Emotional Safety: Viewing Couples Through the Lens of Affect

THE LEGEND OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT ON GREEK AND ROMAN COINS

Karsten Dahmen collects, presents and examines, for the first time in one volume, the portraits and representations of Alexander the Great on ancient coins of the Greek and Roman periods (c. 320 bc to ad 400). Dahmen offers a firsthand insight into the posthumous appreciation of Alexander’s legend by Hellenistic kings, Greek cities, and Roman emperors combining an introduction to the historical background and basic information on the coins with a comprehensive study of Alexander’s numismatic iconography. Dahmen also discusses in detail examples of coins with Alexander’s portrait, which are part of a selective presentation of representative coin-types. An image and discussion is combined with a characteristic quotation of a source from ancient historiography and a short bibliographical reference. The numismatic material presented, although being a representative selection, will exceed any previously published work on the subject. The Legend of Alexander the Great on Greek and Roman Coins will be useful for everyone in the Classics community including students and academics. It will also be accessible for general readers with an interest in ancient history, numismatics, or collecting. Karsten Dahmen is a Classical Archaeologist and Numismatist of the Berlin Coin Cabinet.

THE LEGEND OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT ON GREEK AND ROMAN COINS Karsten Dahmen

First published 2007 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 270 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2007. “To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.”

© 2007 Karsten Dahmen All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Dahmen, Karsten. The legend of Alexander the Great on Greek and Roman coins / Karsten Dahmen.—1st ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Coins, Greek. 2. Coins, Roman. 3. Coins, Ancient. 4. Alexander, the Great, 356–323 B.C.—Portraits. 5. Numismatics, Greek. 6. Numismatics, Roman. 7. Greece—Antiquities. 8. Rome—Antiquities. I. Title. CJ385.D34 2007 737.4932—dc22 2006034904 ISBN 0-203-96799-2 Master e-book ISBN

ISBN10: 0–415–39451–1 (hbk) ISBN10: 0–415–39452–X (pbk) ISBN10: 0–203–96799–2 (ebk) ISBN13: 978–0–415–95451–2 (hbk) ISBN13: 978–0–415–39452–9 (pbk) ISBN13: 978–0–203–96799–7 (ebk)

FOR ANNIKA

What should one say about those people, who use magic charms and amulets, and carry bronze coins of Alexander the Makedonian around their necks and on their feet? John Chrysostom, Ad illuminandos catechesis 2.5 (Patrologia Graeca 49, p. 240).

CONTENTS

Foreword Maps

1

xi xiii

Introduction

1

Images of Alexander: A survey of Alexander’s image on ancient coins

6

2

Man, king, hero and god: Alexander’s changing portraits

39

3

Making good use of a legend

48

4

Excursus: Alexander in disguise

56

Conclusion: perspectives and limitations Notes Plate section (text and images) Description of coins illustrated Selected bibliography Index

ix

58 65 108 156 170 177

FOREWORD

The study of Alexander’s numismatic portrait goes back to my research project ‘Sehnsucht nach Alexander/Longing for Alexander’ which was funded by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation Bonn. I am very grateful for additional support through participation in the foundation’s follow-up programme. I would also like to express my gratitude to my academic host R.R.R. Smith of the Cast Gallery, Ashmolean Museum, and to J. Kelly of St John’s College Oxford for his and the College’s kind hospitality. I am also grateful to a number of colleagues and friends for allowing me to study their institutions’ collections, for support, discussions and criticism while preparing this study: V. Heuchert, C.J. Howgego, H. Kim, Sh. Bhandare and Alessia Bolis, Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum; C.V. Crowther, Centre for the Studies of Ancient Documents Oxford; A. Kropp, University of Nottingham; Chr. Fricker and R. Smith, St John’s College; S. Stevens, Exeter College; Louise Davies, Hillingdon; A. Meadows and J. Cribb, Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum; A. Popescu, Department of Coins & Medals, The Fitzwilliam Museum Cambridge; W. Stancomb, Market Lavington; D. Gerin and M. Amandry, Cabinet des Médailles Paris; F. de Callataÿ, Cabinet des Médailles/ Penningkabinet Brussels; M. Castro Hipólito, Museu Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian Lisbon; F. Lopez Sanchez, Oxford/Zaragoza; S. KremydiSicilianou, Athens; C. Arnold-Biucchi, Harvard University Art Museums; L.M. Yarrow, City University of New York; S. Hurter, Zürich; G. Dembski, Münzkabinett Wien; Chr. Boehringer, Göttingen; D. Salzmann, A. Lichtenberger and K. Martin, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster; B. Weisser, Münzkabinett Berlin; W. Hollstein, Münzkabinett Dresden. All opinions expressed below are those of the author and remain his responsibility, as do any errors.

xi

Map 1: Alexander’s campaigns 334–323 bc Source: From Stoneman 2004: Map 2, reproduced with permission.

Map 2: The Hellenistic World of c. 200 bc

Map 3: Greek cities minting coins with images of Alexander in the Roman period

INTRODUCTION

There are many ways of experiencing Alexander1 III of Makedonia (356–323 bc). Historians and archaeologists have studied his personality, his legacy and the impact of his reign from various perspectives. Material culture and ancient literary sources provide the basis for our modern image of Alexander the Great. This study allows an understanding of the socio-cultural processes which culminated in the rise of Makedonia to be the leading power in Greece, the conquest of the Persian empire and, after Alexander’s death, the fragmentation of his realm. Much of Alexander’s importance lies in his posthumous fame. In antiquity and the medieval and early modern periods, the king and conqueror became a shining vessel of contemporary fascination as well as imagination. Thus we learn not only about Alexander but about the cultural preoccupations of Greek, Roman, Byzantine, and later societies, including our own. This book focuses on the numismatic representations of Alexander the Great in Antiquity. From shortly after his death to the final days of the Roman empire in the West some 750 years later Alexander’s portrait appears on coins. We are confronted with many images of the king, presenting him in a variety of roles. In this way, the contemporary authorities that were responsible for their production – Greek kings and rulers, Greek and Roman citizens and even Roman emperors – gave visual representation to, and immortalised, their very own view of Alexander. Surprisingly enough, this rich corpus of numismatic evidence has not previously been unearthed nor made accessible to both the scholarly community and the public.2 This book tries to read a cultural legend that endures from the creation of Alexander’s myth during his own lifetime to the fifth century ad in the city of Rome. This legend materialises on coins from Ptolemaic Egypt, Seleukid Mesopotamia, Hellenistic Sicily, Greece, Asia Minor and Baktria as well as from the cities of Roman Makedonia, Asia Minor, Kilikia and Arabia, to close with a final appearance of Alexander and his infamous mother on coin-like bronzes from the city of Rome itself. In each and every case their iconography, and often their inscriptions, too, relate to Alexander and thus enable us to trace not only a specific representation of the king but a contemporary society’s motivation for using and distributing it. 1

INTRODUCTION

Imagining Alexander There is no doubt about the large number of representations of Alexander that existed in antiquity. They included statues in stone and bronze, portrait heads and busts, relief in sculpture, statuettes, gems, cameos, appliqués and finger-rings; and also paintings, mosaics and textiles. But when archaeologists try to establish an iconography for Alexander and focus on his portrait, they find a peculiar absence of secure evidence. Apart from the well-known Alexander mosaic in Pompeii only one piece of sculpture – the famous ‘Azara herm’ – offers a positive identification of an Alexander portrait by giving his name (‘Alexander, son of Philip, the Makedonian’) in a badly faded inscription on its shaft.3 Of a more generalised appearance are two representations of Alexander on the Alexander-sarcophagus from Sidon.4 Another portrait-type also surviving in a small number of ancient copies has been labelled ‘Athens-Erbach’ after its most prominent specimens. It has been generally accepted as a representation of the prince Alexander, but lacks a secure identification through an inscription. Two more heads form the so-called Dresden type, again linked through stylistic characteristics. Apart from these few examples we are confronted with a large number5 of individual heads, statues and busts of young unbearded men with windblown hair and tilted heads, characteristics that we, just like the ancients, relate to Alexander.6 They all seem to be in one way similar to each other, but so different in the detailed rendering of their hair and physiognomy as to exclude dependence upon each other. These portraits, whose names were lost with the inscribed base they once stood on, have in almost every case attracted the interest of an archaeologist who tried to identify his or her very own Alexander.7 Unfortunately these characteristics are not restricted to Alexander alone. The eponymous heroes of Greek cities and some personifications – for example, the eponymous hero of Kyzikos and the personification of Demos (people) of a Greek polis8 – are represented in the same way. They even feature a diadem, which strangely enough the surviving portraits of the king Alexander in sculpture lack.9 The ‘surviving Alexanders’ are thus well hidden within a company of ancient look-alikes. But these two heroic figures may lead the way to a new perspective on Alexander as they bring another group of ancient material culture to our attention: coins in gold, silver and bronze of the Hellenistic and Roman periods. These coins, with their representations of Alexander, present a whole cosmos of his portraits often neglected and never appreciated as a group. They are a very telling source of evidence in their own right.

Authority, message and recipient Ancient coins were mass produced. From each pair of dies an average of several thousand coins were struck, often in a sequence of issues and series.10 2

INTRODUCTION

This is why today at least a few specimens of ancient coin-types are usually preserved. In most cases these include well-conserved examples which allow a detailed analysis of their fabric, metal, legend and images. Coins are the only type of material culture carrying iconography and written messages the corpus of which is almost completely conserved in today’s museums and collections. This is very much in contrast to the patchy survival rate of sculptured portraits. Clearly coins have a monetary function, which makes the exchange, storage and transaction of value within a certain economic system possible. But in addition they provide evidence of the mentality and objectives of those who produced and used them. They are ‘the most deliberate of all symbols of public identity’.11 They often enable us to witness a political body’s or authority’s self-definition within the framework of related sources such as inscriptions, literary evidence and architectural monuments. Since they were issued by authorities such as kings, rulers and cities, these coins are also products of each authority’s political programme and agenda. By nature such a product only carries the positive messages and connotations that the minting authority wanted to publish and distribute to the public. Both the choice of subject and its depiction represent a significant and always deliberate choice. Hence a coin must be considered an official document. The king and ruler of the Hellenistic age was an absolute monarch with no legal restrictions on his power. It was a royal privilege to strike coins in the name of the king and with his portrait. In theory the king would decide on what kind of coinage would be produced – whether in gold, silver or bronze, in which quantity and with which design. In practice factors such as resources, economic and military needs, and cultural traditions had a significant influence on the character of a royal coinage in circulation. Nevertheless, in coins carrying the king’s name and produced through his minting authorities we can perceive the political agenda and ideology of the monarch and his court.12 In contrast the money issued by cities is shaped by different factors.13 These coins were issued by a variety of communities including those with the status of a Roman colony or by leagues (Greek koinon, representing a federal body of cities in one particular region). In this period cities would, with a few exceptions, produce only bronze coinage.14 For the period from the mid-first century bc to the late 270/280s ad we know of perhaps as many as 500 city-states and leagues striking coins. The numbers of coin-types represented may add up to nearly 100,000.15 These cities are located mainly in the Hellenised eastern region of the Roman empire, though until the first century ad Spain, Italy, Sicily and Africa also offer a rich corpus of civic coinage.16 A community did not always produce coins throughout its existence. Often phases in which coins were issued were followed by phases of inactivity. Such civic bronze coins would circulate only in the territory of each city or the relevant region.17 Their area of circulation was obviously restricted in accordance with their function as small change in everyday life. For transfers 3

INTRODUCTION

of higher values in the Roman period imperial coinage from Rome itself, and some provincial mints, performed the role of an ‘international’ (i.e. commonly accepted) currency. A city’s coinage was shaped by two main aspects. The first was the city’s geographical and regional location, which determines a characteristic tradition of production and iconography. The second was the minting authority’s motivation to produce and design civic money, a factor itself dependent on a variety of mostly interacting motivations. One clear reason was the simple need to have such a coinage, as this offered several advantages for a city. Small change in bronze coins stimulated local and regional trade by allowing transactions; lack of these small denominations on the other hand would have hindered trade. Its existence brought an even more direct income to a city. It allowed the authorities to charge visitors for changing their silver and gold currency into bronze coins for everyday needs. This charge is nothing other than a tax. Hence the level of monetarisation and supply of bronze coins would affect the decision to strike coins or not. But most of all, civic coins are a product of a city’s self-representation and identity. They represent a very flexible, easily produced medium and are a first-class carrier of the messages these communities intended to communicate. These communities’ common need to formulate their own greatness and importance is mirrored in their respective coinages. Prominent temples and monuments, important deities, privileges and titles already accumulated in competition with neighbouring cities in a province or region are all represented in public through coins with related iconography and legends.18 Showing one’s merits to the public was also a motivation for the magistrate responsible for issuing coins. As in every Greek city, this officer, who had various duties, was elected for a certain period. Being a member of the city’s elite and having a considerable income, he was expected to use his personal wealth for the community’s benefit. Such a leiturgia (or in Latin munera) could involve paying for the raw materials needed and the production costs of an issue of coins. Inscriptions in stone and some typical formulae on coins name these magistrates and record appreciation of their deeds and the city council’s authorisation and approval.19 Especially during the so-called second sophistic from the second century ad onwards, the competition between cities and for imperial privileges such as maintaining temples for the imperial cult and honorary titles reached unknown levels.20 This period witnessed a raised awareness of being part of a shared Greek cultural identity. It created an atmosphere of remembering (or, very often, creating) a noble past as part of the city’s present identity, as can be seen from the civic coinage. To prove a city’s age and prominence it was of the utmost importance to explicitly identify the circumstances of its foundation. Greek roots were of significance, but it was also important to identify a specific individual responsible for the city’s existence. This founder figure (Greek ktistes) was not always a god or mythological hero. In many cases cities referred to actual historical individuals.21 This is why Alexander comes 4

INTRODUCTION

to be portrayed on civic coins. His deeds, fame and legend provided a strong argument in favour of the importance and noble descent (Greek eugeneia) of a city claiming (rightly or wrongly) to have been founded by the famous conqueror. Depending on their individual history, each of these cities features its own appreciation and interpretation of Alexander. They transform his already existing legend for their own purposes, thus creating a corpus of representations depending on and varying according to geographical and cultural preferences. Civic coins were, on the other hand, also influenced by the Roman imperial coinage and its iconography. Certain trends and contemporary preferences found their way on to the civic coins and the coins also reacted to the emperor’s personal agenda. We know that Caracalla (Augustus from ad 198 onwards, reigned ad 211–217) very much favoured Alexander and Makedonian traditions. He actually identified himself with Alexander through gestures and actions.22 Although imperial coins do not show any such images, there are two representations of this emperor wearing a shield depicting Alexander, and a number of portraits of Alexander were issued on civic coins during his reign. Here it becomes obvious that through money a city and its inhabitants are expressing loyalty and commitment to the emperor.23 Hence these coins, both civic and royal, not only provide us with a special kind of representation of Alexander’s image through the centuries, but also tell us about their producers and recipients, and their cultural, regional and chronological setting. This information is only provided by these numismatic objects. It is often lost in relation to other, more prominent sources, for example when a statue appears separated from its archaeological context and its inscribed base. This book does not intend to present another history of Alexander and his person. It is the use of Alexander’s image on Greek and Roman coins, and a reminder of the strong links between history and coinage, which remain the focus of this work. Being aware of the demand and importance of discussing the historical background, I will give references to the works of modern historians and ancient sources where appropriate; more detailed and learned insights are available for the reader there.

5

1 IMAGES OF ALEXANDER: A SURVEY OF ALEXANDER’S IMAGE ON ANCIENT COINS A small number of representations of Alexander during his lifetime survive in sculpture, but the use of his likeness on coins is mostly a posthumous phenomenon. Soon after the king’s death in 323 bc new coin-types issued by his successors rival Alexander’s own money of the Herakles/Zeus and Athena/ Nike-types (plate 1). Coins of Ptolemy, Lysimachos and Seleukos (plates 4–5; 7–8) present Alexander, now god and source of legitimacy for these very rulers, following Greek iconographic traditions. More difficult to approach are the earliest examples of Alexander’s portrait on coins, presumably issued in the late 320s when the king was still alive.1 Not only the scenes depicted there but also the circumstances of production, distribution and geographical setting remain controversial. Our knowledge is still overshadowed by the mysteries of the past. In 1887, the first specimen of what is referred to as the ‘Poros’ or ‘elephant medallions’ was published (plate 2).2 By now their number has grown to a total of ten pieces, mainly as a consequence of a hoard unearthed in Iraq around 1973, which included seven such specimens.3 The obverse scene depicting a horseman in Greek armour attacking a war elephant carrying a warrior and a mahout, and the reverse with this same Greek soldier on foot had instantly been linked with Alexander the Great. While the battle scene is reminiscent of Alexander’s battle against Poros at the Hydaspes in 326 bc, the first such encounter between East and West on record, the reverse makes this identification even more obvious: Alexander is wearing a Phrygian-type helmet with two characteristic plumes attached. A helmet of this type is described by ancient historians as the one the king wore in battle.4 And Alexander’s attribute in his hand, the thunderbolt of Zeus, who was said to be his father, together with Nike, the goddess of victory, who is crowning him, stress this identification, too. Alexander is represented as a semi-divine ruler whose military virtue is referred to by his costume. A very similar depiction of Alexander, this time naked and thus broadly linked to a heroic sphere, was once painted by Apelles.5 The general idea of moving the very much alive monarch into a sphere beyond ordinary humans is realised in both cases. Similar to this very artificial and hence unrealistic depiction, the battle scene 6

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

on the obverse must not be regarded as more trustworthy. It follows an ideology, too, here by abbreviating and simplifying the action on the battlefield to one characterising the outcome. Although Alexander and Poros actually never met before the battle was over, the fleeing elephant, its desperate crew and Alexander’s rearing horse leave no doubt about who won in the end.6 Some parallels can be found for this highly complex representation of a warrior equipped with helmet and thunderbolt and his counterpart on horseback attacking the war elephant. The Neisos gem also presents Alexander, this time diademed, holding a thunderbolt, though naked. Shield and eagle again stress military virtue and divine support.7 Ancient sources report the existence of a painting by Apelles, now lost, featuring Alexander Keraunophoros (Alexander holding a thunderbolt).8 We know nothing about any detail of this famous painting in Ephesos and the statuary type implied, but are simply told that Alexander had such an attribute and that he was not represented naked. Alexander as a victor on horseback – naturally without the elephant – is much more prominent in contemporary and later art; it quickly becomes an iconographic formula used for heroic and royal figures as well.9 While the interpretation of these representations is obvious, the question of where, when and by whom these medals were produced is as challenging as the one of what to call these numismatic objects (coins, medals, medallions?).10 The weights, for example, range from 38.73 to 42.20 grams. This variation in weight would be very uncharacteristic of official issues of coins by Greek kings and cities. The standard used does not correspond to any Greek one which would in this period be based on the so-called Attic standard (known from Alexander’s regular money in gold and silver). This has encouraged scholars to call these medallions either dekadrachms or 5-shekel pieces, both mere auxiliary terms intended to indicate the approximate weight. It seems that we are not dealing with regular coinage, an argument supported by the comparably high denomination (of whatever kind) and the small numbers of surviving specimens and dies. The problem lies in explaining the reasons for this. Coins of the same fabric and especially the same broad flans are, however, found in issues of money in Makedonian-occupied Mesopotamia, reflecting the need for a regional coinage that was restricted to this area and did not compete with Alexander’s official coins. Another alternative would be to consider the medallions as a product of a mobile and only temporarily active mint, possibly moving with the army and hence remaining dependent on resources at hand. The battle scene depicted on the obverse relates to India, but it is not clear where and by whom these medallions were produced and distributed. The finding place of the first piece was Afghanistan, and the others originate from Iraq. Were they issued by Alexander himself after he had successfully fought the Indians or are they slightly later and originate presumably from 7

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

Mesopotamia, where officials were eager to show loyalty to the king and spread the news of his victory by issuing such medallions? The discussion of how to interpret these pieces goes on. The Iraq hoard of 1973 has made us aware of two more types of similar pieces in a smaller denomination (hence called tetradrachms or 2-shekel pieces). Style, fabric and monograms are identical to the elephant medallions while the scenes depicted show an archer and a standing elephant (E/A), and a chariot and an elephant with his riders (E/C) respectively.11 None of these troops are of Greek or Makedonian origin; they are usually thought to be representations of Indian units. However, others prefer an identification as Persian troops. Recently, F. Holt has tried to explain all these numismatic objects as a victory issue of Alexander distributed to his troops on the banks of the Hydaspes as their reward for a valiant and dramatic fight. He understands them as showing the crack units of Poros’ army, whose defeat on the battlefield made Alexander’s victory possible at last. But the question is, why should Alexander have represented his foes so prominently in a pose lacking any sign of their defeat and misery, which is what we have to expect from the traditions of ancient iconography. And why then is there no depiction of the Indian cavalry, which played such an important role? With the exception of the scene showing Alexander attacking the elephant there is hardly any representation of someone close to defeat. We also lack a depiction of the victor slaying his foe, which would be the natural choice of motif for such a coin. Should we not expect members of the Makedonian cavalry in a victorious pose instead, soldiers on foot, at the heart of the battle line, and elite infantry such as the silvershields? Moreover, the single elephant of Holt’s type E/B has not lost his rider, but stands as a symbol of royal power and rule, the troops represented (archer and chariot) stand for the ability and readiness to join the fight. And why would Alexander not have his name engraved on these precious pieces as he did on his regular coinage, indicating the king’s authority? A victory issue by Alexander himself is thus highly improbable. Place and circumstances of production remain uncertain, too. Small numbers indicate a short-lived issue, but poor fabric and varying weight do not necessarily suggest an origin from a mobile army mint. Comparable specimens from Mesopotamia have been mentioned already. Finally, the existence of at least two different denominations (type E/A and type E/B and E/C respectively) seems to provide evidence for the fact that our ‘medallions’ actually were coins (i.e., money intended for circulation as an exchange of value) as they also show obvious traces of wear (while high-value medallions would most probably be kept and not be put into circulation). The result remains unsatisfactory: we must rule out Alexander himself as the creator of these fascinating objects, and we should distance ourselves from India as their place of origin. Mesopotamia remains an option and the possible influence of Persian pictorial tradition should be examined in much greater 8

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

depth. What is certain is that we should treasure the first and earliest representation of Alexander on these Poros medallions, originating from authorities within Alexander’s empire and distributed either while Alexander was still alive or in the very early years after 323 bc.12 A recently published gold coin with Alexander wearing an elephant’s scalp on the obverse and the figure of an elephant on the reverse is of very questionable authenticity.13 Of a more humble background is Alexander’s second appearance on coins, this time in Egypt (plate 3). M.J. Price nearly 25 years ago identified two types of small bronze coins as representations of Alexander.14 One is assigned to the city of Naukratis,15 Egypt’s gateway to the Mediterranean and the Greek world since Pharaonic times. It shows on the obverse the bare head of a young and beardless male and below the Greek letters AΛE. The reverse features the head of a woman, presumably the city’s main goddess, and the abbreviated identification of the issuing city, NAY.16 The second type represents a smaller denomination, again in bronze.17 Here, the obverse shows another beardless male head, which this time is wearing a distinctive curved helmet or cap of the Phrygian type. The forepart of a winged horse (Pegasos) features on the reverse, together with the single letter A (for Alexander?) and a wreath. While the Naukratis coins are easy to assign to this city through their legend, the case of the warrior’s head and Pegasos is different. Because the Pegasos features prominently on civic money from Lampsakos in western Asia Minor, the few known specimens used to be identified as those of a Persian satrap based in this city.18 Archaeological excavations in the cemetery of Saqqara provided evidence for at least four such pieces,19 and support this theory. Bronze coins did not circulate widely, and hence it makes sense to attribute them to the town of Memphis, whose necropolis is the site of Saqqara. We therefore encounter two different bronze coinages of each leading city in Egypt in the late fourth century bc. Alexander arrived in Egypt and stayed in Memphis from November 333 until March 331 bc. He most probably took up residence in Memphis,20 where later Ptolemy had his court before moving it to Alexandria. Both types fit into the historical situation between Alexander’s arrival in Egypt and Ptolemy’s later and steadily increasing gain of power in that country. As the mint of Alexandria did not start production before c. 325 bc, the Naukratis coin at least presumably dates between before c. 331 and before 325 bc.21 Both types are certainly earlier than Ptolemy’s bronze coinages, which were not introduced before 322 bc. The coins with a Phrygian-type helmet iconographically continue the tradition of satrapal coinages known from Asia Minor. This representation was familiar to the local population in Egypt, accustomed to Persian rule since the sixth century bc. It would then be rooted in Persian pictorial traditions. We would not necessarily expect Alexander himself to have issued such coins but local authorities – either the city’s governing body, most probably in 9

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

close collaboration with Alexander’s administrators, or these new Makedonian satraps themselves – might have done so. Fulfilling the need for small change in the region and combining this with an open declaration of loyalty to the new ruler serves both interests. The pieces from Memphis are therefore the second example of a warrior-like representation of Alexander wearing his characteristic helmet. The king is depicted in his role as a military leader, emphasising his virtues in battle. The bare head on the coins from Naukratis takes another approach on how to appreciate Alexander in his lifetime. Originating from a Greek settlement, formerly within the Persian empire, just like the cities Alexander’s army had recently liberated in Ionia and along the coasts of the Levant, the Naukratis portrait recalls monuments which were quickly erected by these communities to show gratitude and loyalty towards their new ruler (even when he had granted them autonomy).22 They may best be imagined as showing the young king in a heroic pose, possibly carrying a spear and either in military attire or simply nude. Their iconography is purely Greek. Though these bronzes provide us with two types of portraits of Alexander, it is significant that the much more important silver and gold coinage continued in conventional patterns and did not portray the king. The next appearance of Alexander is strongly connected with the career of Ptolemy, son of Lagos, the ruler of Egypt from 322 to 283 bc (plates 4–5). Alexander’s portrait, including one highly telling dramatic depiction, plays an important role in Ptolemy’s rise to power and in legitimating his claim to govern the country. Ptolemy presents us with the first example of any portrait of Alexander after the king’s death in June 323 bc. It is remarkable that among the many lieutenants of Alexander only Ptolemy makes elaborate use of the king, while his rivals either allow Alexander’s portrait to feature on their coins for only a short period, as did Seleukos I (plate 7) or – in the case of Lysimachos (plate 8) more than 20 years later – simply continue traditional types. At this early stage, Alexander having been dead for just a year and Ptolemy recently having driven his rival Kleomenes out of the country, Ptolemy established his power. In 321 bc he managed to hijack Alexander’s body, the most precious booty for any successor, in Syria on his way to Makedonia.23 The dead king was buried first in the residence at Memphis. With the relocation of Ptolemy’s capital to Alexandria, Alexander’s own foundation, in 320/319 bc, the king’s body was laid finally to rest in an elaborate ceremony. The same year witnessed Ptolemy’s final consolidation of his rule by defeating Perdikkas and his invading army. Ptolemy would govern Egypt until his death in 283 bc, but declare himself king only as late as 305/304 bc, following the example of Antigonos and others.24 This development in the aftermath of Perdikkas’ defeat is highlighted by a dramatic change in the coinage of the mints in Egypt.25 Ptolemy at this point is the only one of the successors to discontinue Alexander’s familiar Herakles/ Zeus type in silver, choosing instead to introduce silver coins with a new 10

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

obverse representation:26 the head of the deified Alexander wearing an elephant’s scalp and the horns of Zeus Ammon (plate 4).27 The new obverse design is linked to the familiar Zeus reverse already in use on Alexander’s own coins.28 It shows Alexander’s head in profile almost totally covered by the skin of an elephant. The animal’s trunk is bent backwards and finally reaches forwards again; both tusks are visible. The elephant’s ear, smaller at the beginning,29 lies straight along the head. The ends of the skin are knotted below the chin, just as they used to be in the case of Herakles and his lion’s scalp.30 Below the elephant’s skin the horn of a ram, an attribute of Zeus Ammon, is barely visible;31 only its smaller parts are not covered. This recalls Alexander’s visit to the oracle at Siwah in 331 bc and his claim to be the son of Zeus Ammon.32 The stylistic rendering of the face is different from later versions: facial features are less broad and calm, the eyes are highlighted by strong eyebrows.33 Although of full Attic weight (17.2 grams) and hence comparable to the money circulating in the rest of Alexander’s former empire, these and the later full-weight elephant coins of Ptolemy are, with very few exceptions, limited to his realm.34 The next change came very quickly. Around 317 bc small alterations of the obverse formulate additional qualities of the divine king.35 Alexander now wears a fillet around his head. The scalp moves up and allows Alexander’s characteristic vivid locks to be seen forming an anastolé. Because the fillet, which at first sight may be misunderstood as a royal diadem, is placed below the hairline, it is likely to allude to an attribute of Dionysos – the mitra.36 The ends of the skin of the elephant are still knotted below the chin and terminate in a serpent-like shape. Within a year another modification finalises the attributes of Alexander’s obverse portrait.37 The elephant’s skin takes more room below and is decorated with scales, finally indicating an aegis, Alexander’s new attribute borrowed from Zeus. It seems that the die engravers of this period were trying to reach a final and more homogeneous pattern in their obverses. The coins of this stage show how they were trying to achieve their goal. This observation is supported by the fact that the style of the portrait becomes more classicised and static. A uniform pattern is now favoured which features an idealised physiognomy, leaving no room for individual characteristics. The eyebrow has become nearly vertical and is less prominent than it used to be.38 The extent to which this final stage in the development of the obverse portrait of Alexander is the result of a conscious effort is made clear by the final (visible) change on this type of coins of Ptolemy.39 From 316/315 bc on (and until this coinage ceases in 301 bc) a new reverse takes the place of Zeus, finally driving out the last memory of Alexander’s Herakles-type coinage. Now it is Athena Promachos40 who is prominently brandishing her spear, but the legend still refers to Alexander. In addition to four-drachma pieces, smaller denominations of one and a half units in silver are produced. There 11

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

are no more changes of Alexander’s portrait to be reported, but Ptolemy’s financial policy manages to reduce the weight of issues from c. 312/311 bc onwards, allowing some series to overlap.41 At the same time, around 315 bc, this updated version of Alexander’s portrait appears in a small series of gold staters of which only three examples are known to exist.42 The reverse shows the prow of a ship (in Greek prora). There is no legend identifying the authority responsible for this issue. The style of the obverse portrait leaves no doubt that it is of Ptolemaic origin as it is reminiscent of contemporary silver coins from Alexandria.43 The only visible difference from the contemporary portrait is a slight enlargement of the area around the neck allowing an additional fourth row of scales to be depicted. The specimen in the Gulbenkian Collection even has an extra line of dots marking the upper border of the scaly aegis. In contrast to Ptolemy’s satrapal coins of Attic and reduced weight in silver discussed above, these rare staters circulated outside Egypt.44 The rareness of these staters permits us to suggest that their production was related to a specific occasion, most probably a military victory. Keeping in mind the ship’s prow on the reverse one might consider a naval victory. Ptolemy’s successes in Cyprus in combination with an engagement of the Ptolemaic fleet may have provided the background for such a prestigious coinage.45 Alexander’s last appearance on Ptolemaic gold coinage dates from a decade later.46 As they already bear Ptolemy’s portrait on the obverse and his name and title on the reverse, these coins must belong to the period beginning c. 305 bc and terminating around 298 bc.47 They present a new and fascinating depiction of Alexander, for the first and only time on Ptolemaic coinage, in the form of a whole scene. Alexander wearing a diadem on his head and an aegis on his shoulder parades in a chariot which is pulled by four elephants. The connotations offered by this scene are various and all formulate the divine, superhuman character of the dead king. The pachyderms remind us of his deeds in India, but also present these animals as the new symbol of supreme royal power in the Hellenistic period. An almost naked Alexander is again placed in a heroic setting, the aegis alludes to Zeus, while the fillet, most probably now a true diadem, symbolises his royal status. This scene may even relate to a monument depicting Alexander in such a situation. Reports of the famous procession of Ptolemaios II in 275/274 bc, featuring his army and a parade of religious and cultic representations marching through Alexandria, describe a very similar scene.48 They mention a statue of Alexander which is shown being driven in a similar chariot, again with four elephants in front. As both the numismatic and the literary evidence, although roughly 30 years apart, shows such a correspondence, there might have existed a representation of Alexander driving in a quadriga of elephants as early as the time of Ptolemy I. Minting such gold coins which would leave Egypt49 with Alexander’s 12

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

portrait on them, would in connection with the geographical restriction of the rest of the silver money, imply a rare case of Ptolemy stressing his affiliation with Alexander in a comparably straightforward way.50 In the same period of around 316 bc when the portrait-type with the elephant’s scalp is finally updated, occurs the creation of another portrait of Alexander on Ptolemaic coinage, exclusively used for bronze coins (plate 5).51 From 316/315 bc onwards the head of a young man, beardless and wearing a fillet (mitra) with short hair is depicted until c. 305 bc,52 when the same type changes to much longer hair.53 The break in between coincides with the rapid disappearance of Alexander from the much more important gold and silver money around 305/304 bc, i.e. when Ptolemy took the royal title himself. The later version ends c. 283 bc. Both versions present Alexander with a tiny ram’s horn and his characteristic rebellious locks (anastolé). Facial features are again quite classicised and lack any individuality.54 Omitting the elephant’s scalp and the aegis, these portraits focus on Alexander and his relationship to Zeus Ammon,55 possibly aiming at some nationalistic Egyptian tone, but formulating it by means of Greek iconography.56 One has to remember that these bronzes would only circulate in Egypt proper as small change and hence be aimed at the local population. These portraits reflect the contemporary need to enlarge the iconographic programme and elaborate on an alternative to the types with an elephant’s scalp. The older version with short hair is reminiscent of the bronzes from Naukratis, but has to be viewed as an independent development. Solely stressing Alexander’s relationship with Zeus Ammon and equipping him with horn and mitra appears almost modest in comparison with the much more elaborate designs in silver and gold (for bronzes see below). More often Ptolemaic coinage and art relies on such representations.57 Showing Alexander with short and almost motionless hair is uncommon at this early stage58 and may have been replaced by longer hair, following a more heroic and divine pattern in depicting him. The Dionysiac mitra he wears brings to mind that god also.59 From c. 305 bc onwards, when Ptolemy finally claims the royal title, another alteration is made. While Ptolemy himself takes Alexander’s place on gold and silver coins and the change from the short-haired to the long-haired Alexander happens in bronze, the contemporary elephant’s scalp Alexander type is transferred to bronze coins.60 It appears to be almost a compensation for removing him from the money in precious metals. Down to c. 283 bc this elephant-type runs parallel to the one with longer hair and mitra (and the regular bronze types with the bearded god Zeus Ammon), only to decrease in numbers rapidly during the third century bc.61 Their latest appearance is under Ptolemaios V (205–180 bc).62 Alexander’s posthumous career on Ptolemy’s coinage is thus an indication of the emancipation and increasing self-confidence of this ruler. Alexander proved to be a useful token of legitimacy after his death, but when taking the 13

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

title for himself on coins the true ruler of Egypt takes over. Alexander is of great symbolic importance in times of insecurity and a fragile balance of power during the genesis of early Hellenistic kingdoms, but has to leave the stage once things are calmer.63 Very soon Ptolemy’s example led others to follow (plate 6). One extremely rare series of staters in the name of Agathokles, ruler and later king of Syracuse in Sicily (reigned 316/315–289/288 bc), shows on its obverses a young head wearing an elephant’s scalp;64 it is not clear if the horns of the god Zeus Ammon are also represented.65 The reverse re-models Ptolemy’s familiar badge on his silver coinage, Athena, giving her wings and adding an owl in the right field.66 This similarity is only partly explained by the close association of Agathokles and the Ptolemaic governor of Kyrene, Ophellas, who at least for some time had common interests. Setting out in 310 bc on an expedition to take Carthage, whose troops in return were laying siege to Syracuse, Agathokles first successfully engaged his foe’s army in battle. For some time he was supported by Ptolemy.67 But he did not manage to take the capital and the campaign finally ended in 307 bc. There were even rumours at home in Sicily, hard pressed by a Carthaginian army, that Agathokles had already died. The day was saved for the people of Syracuse, though, and this chain of events provides the background for the production of these coins.68 Reportedly just before the battle against the Carthaginians Agathokles encouraged his fickle soldiers by pretending to have divine support: he released a number of owls, the bird associated with Athena, among his troops, making them see this as an omen of future victory.69 This unexpected success and even the news of it arriving in a besieged Syracuse were responsible for the production of this rare coinage. Unfortunately none of the three surviving specimens is provenanced, but their fabric and legends characteristically link them with issues from Syracuse.70 Keeping in mind the close links with the Ptolemaic prototype there is no doubt that it is Alexander who is represented on the obverse. Attempts to identify a personification or even Agathokles himself cannot succeed.71 Alexander wearing an elephant’s scalp hence had now become an international symbol of the bringer of victory, a precious token of military virtue detached from Egyptian soil.72 The reverse with a winged Athena itself communicates these same qualities, again copying a Ptolemaic design, but adding her companion, the owl, as a clear reminder of Agathokles’ good fortune. With Seleukos I of Syria another of Alexander’s lieutenants makes good use of his former lord’s portrait (plate 7). But very much in contrast to Ptolemy’s intensive exploitation of Alexander’s powerful image on coins, the numismatic evidence in the case of Seleukos shows a remarkably different approach. Only very few issues in bronze and gold feature Alexander’s portrait and they are restricted to the period of c. 300–298 bc. Alexander plays only a 14

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

minor part in Seleukid coinage, originating exclusively from mints in Mesopotamia. As in the case of Ptolemy, Alexander is equipped with the scalp of an elephant. But this is the only parallel as the Seleukid Alexanders in bronze have no fillet (or mitra), horn or aegis.73 The more important darics and double darics,74 on the other hand, seem to indicate some kind of scaly aegis, as this part of the scalp is decorated with dots; but it still maintains the knotted paws of the earlier lion’s scalp familiar from Alexander’s own Herakles/ Zeus-type silver coins. Leaving out these attributes – especially the ram’s horn – may have helped in some way to create a variant of this derivation from a Ptolemaic model which allowed it to be identified as different, i.e. Seleukid. Not referring to Zeus Ammon removed any specifically Egyptian connotation and allowed those who see it to experience an image not used before. Seleukos had certainly had knowledge of the images of Alexander in Egypt as he spent his years of exile in Alexandria, when driven out of Mesopotamia by Antigonos from 316–312 bc.75 It is remarkable, however, that his representation of Alexander with the elephant’s scalp is not dependent on contemporary Ptolemaic coin designs. It is only reminiscent of early types from c. 322–317 bc (but still without the ram’s horn). Just as these Ptolemaic types give evidence of a gradual development in the creation of a portrait of Alexander, the one by Seleukos seems to represent another witness of a not yet homogeneous and established canon of portraits;76 except that in the case of Seleukos this type was discontinued after a very brief period of production. Considering this time frame there are only a few alternatives which could account for the minting of these coins. Alexander never played any role in Seleukos’ coinage except in these years around 300 bc: Seleukos himself embarked on a campaign on the frontiers of India in 307–302 bc following in Alexander’s footsteps. Although he did not succeed in bringing this region under permanent Seleukid control, Seleukos made the Mauryan king Chandragupta sign a treaty including the delivery of 500 war elephants to Seleukos probably in 303 bc.77 It is possible that the fifth anniversary of this campaign (or of Seleukos’ return) created a convenient opportunity for remembering Seleukos’ exploits in this campaign by drawing parallels to Alexander,78 turning the latter into a token of success and divine support. At the same time Antigonos was defeated by the combined forces of Seleukos, Ptolemy and Lysimachos in 301 bc: 79 again enough reason to demonstrate a close relationship to this figurehead of any early Hellenistic ruler. And even an event such as the foundation of Seleukia on the Tigris cannot be ruled out.80 But whichever event is to be credited, in Seleukos’ case Alexander’s elephant scalp for the first time has a regional and personal significance. Either following him into India or possessing an army of elephants81 adds something to the more general connotations of divinity of Alexander’s elephant’s scalp that any other successor reproducing such a portrait of Alexander did not have to offer.82 15

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

Lysimachos of Thrace is the third former lieutenant of Alexander’s to finally make use of the king’s portrait on his coins (plate 8). Following the example of Antigonos and the other successors he took the royal diadem in 305/304 bc. During the establishment of individual realms in the aftermath of Alexander’s death, Lysimachos played only a minor role for about twenty years, being limited to Thrace and the Euxine region. It was only with the defeat of Antigonos the One-eyed in 301 bc that Lysimachos’ influence grew. He gained control over western Asia Minor and over Bithynia in 289 bc, and temporarily over Makedonia in 288 and 284 bc respectively. Although suffering an offensive by Antigonos’ son Demetrios in Ionia in 287 bc, Lysimachos maintained his rule east and west of the Aegean until meeting his fate at Kurupedion in 281 bc. Defeated by Seleukos I, he died in battle when about 70–80 years of age.83 In matters of finance and coinage Lysimachos developed similarly from rather mediocre beginnings.84 He did not have a mint under his control until as late as 309/304 bc after the foundation of his new capital Lysimacheia and his assumption of the title Basileus. Before this date he relied on support from his ally Kassandros, who made intensive use of the Pella and Amphipolis mints from 315 bc onwards, producing large numbers of coins in the types of Philip II and Alexander III. Only as late as c. 305 bc did Lysimachos issue the first coins of his own, still in these earlier types, but with his initial ΛΥ and his personal badge, the forequarters of a lion.85 The number of mints increased with the growth of his realm. From c. 299/298 bc onwards he changed to Alexander types (i.e. Herakles/Zeus in silver and Athena/Nike in gold) with a legend now referring to himself as king. With the death of Kassandros in 297 bc Lysimachos undertakes a dramatic change in his royal coinage.86 Now a portrait of Alexander the Great features on the obverse. The dead king is wearing a royal diadem, clearly visible above the hairline. In addition an impressive and proportionately huge ram’s horn stresses his divine background while vivid locks on the front of his head resemble the anastolé. On the reverse appears Athena, Alexander’s former guardian, sitting on a throne and holding Nike, the goddess of victory, in her right hand.87 It only stresses the complex, but also obvious message this new coin image conveys, that Nike is now crowning the name of Lysimachos in the legend. Lysimachos’ creation of this new powerful type of Alexander portrait is one of the most famous and successful representations of the dead king. Its prototype certainly was the work of one of the most gifted engravers of his time. In consequence, this type was continued even after the death of Lysimachos and then put to good use by cities mainly in the Black Sea region down to the first century bc.88 There are two variants of Lysimachos’ portrait of Alexander. On the earlier coins the ram’s horn carefully curves around the right ear. From c. 287 bc onwards a second type was being introduced, which runs parallel to the first one. The ram’s horn now runs across the ear.89 16

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

Lysimachos made use of a portrait of Alexander at a time when others had already removed Alexander from their coinage (and taken his place instead). Putting the divine king’s image on his coins at that time represents a very explicit claim of being a legitimate successor of Alexander. We have seen a similar type already on some bronze types of Ptolemy of c. 315–304 bc, but given the latter’s regional restriction to Egypt, there is no doubt about the genuine invention of Lysimachos’ new type by his court artist. Lysimachos’ Alexander wears the diadem and not an attribute of Dionysos (the mitra), and the physiognomy has now changed to energetic and powerful notions of dynamism, expressing the will to power. The ram’s horn now takes a much more prominent position clearly shaping the portrait’s whole appearance. It relates, as it does on the coinage of Ptolemy, to Alexander’s supposedly divine origins and Zeus Ammon in particular.90 But in contrast to these earlier coinages this does not convey a national or Egyptian connotation, which would not have been appropriate nor in the interest of Lysimachos’ self-representation as an independent king and ruler.91 The ram’s horn certainly must now, some twenty years later, reflect a developed contemporary understanding of Alexander’s image and its use in public; there is more to it than the oracle in Siwah and the god fathering Alexander. Andrew Stewart92 has suggested a convincing explanation: one has to leave the long-established Ptolemaic path in interpreting the ram’s horn. Considering contemporary traditions as early as the beginning of the third century bc in relation to Alexander’s visit to the oracle at Siwah, the promises given to Alexander were by now far from being limited to Egypt alone. Alexander would be king and rule over the world until he joined the gods.93 Such a perspective would suit Lysimachos very well. Alexander the invincible god once again becomes the guardian of another of his former officers, now a king himself. Using Alexander as an figurehead of his own interests, Lysimachos is able to hide behind Alexander’s universal invincibility and finally adopt some of his qualities (considering also the coin reverse). Alexander’s royal diadem not only represents his holding of this office, but also shows that the promise given to the king by the oracle has been fulfilled.94 One of Lysimachos’ sons, called Ptolemaios, issued bronze coins of this type with reverse legends relating to the city of Telemessos in Lykia around 240 bc.95 There is no explanation other than the relation between father and son for this re-use of this portrait-type. Interestingly enough the reverse depicts a walking lion, thus again quoting a coin-type of Lysimachos only found on his royal bronze coins.96 Alexander’s portrait reappears on Hellenistic royal coinage only once more, and then after a break of some 70 years. For the second and later generation of Hellenistic kings there was simply no need to portray Alexander the Great on their coinage as the image of the ruling kings was now regularly depicted on the obverse. 17

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

The sole exception is the case of Agathokles of Baktria (reigned c. 185– 170 bc), one of the rulers in the East between Afghanistan and northern India, where Greek and native influences were blending into a distinct and fascinating culture. This region gained independence from Seleukid rule in the third century bc, but at the beginning of the second century bc gradually fragmented into smaller rival territories. Agathokles was only one of these kings, presumably allied with one Antimachos, and probably struggling to fight a usurper called Eukratides at the time of issuing these coins.97 During this period both kings issued a series of so-called pedigree coins. They featured the portrait of a famous predecessor on the obverse and the reverse type was copied from this individual’s royal coinage. The obverse legend refers to this earlier king and his cult epithet, and the reverse names Agathokles and Antimachos respectively as reigning kings, hence using a very uncommon formula. These series give evidence of a ruler cult incorporating the ancestors of the current king and thus stressing his legitimacy.98 At the top of his family tree, Agathokles places Alexander the Great (plate 9), claiming the strongest and most powerful former king for his interests.99 Alexander is depicted wearing the scalp of a lion, and the legend identifies him as ‘Alexander, the son of Philip’ (there is clearly no need for a divine epithet in Alexander’s case). This recalls the tetradrachms issued in Alexander’s own lifetime which featured the god Herakles wearing the skin of the Nemean lion. Agathokles’ coins provide us with the first posthumous case of representing Herakles and Alexander himself with the same portrait type.100 Although the model is taken from a type in use under Alexander, Agathokles’ interpretation includes obvious characteristics of contemporary style. In contrast to fourth-century Alexander coins with youthful and idealised facial features, the Alexander of Agathokles has an expressive and powerful physiognomy highlighting the king’s qualities and also following the contemporary taste of the second century bc. Like contemporary civic Herakles-type coins (posthumous Alexander coinage), this portrait shows much broader and differentiated facial structures. It is proof of the strong attraction of this Herakles-type familiar to contemporaries through Alexander’s lifetime and later posthumous issues, that only the legend had to be changed, now also giving the patronymic and hence changing the legend from one referring to the issuing authority to one naming the represented individual. To characterise Alexander’s royal status by a diadem was neither necessary nor would it have fitted this Herakles-type. Alexander’s homeland Makedonia became a Roman province in 148 bc. A series of silver coins minted in the first half of the first century bc provides us with a rare repetition of the king’s legend and gives an insight into the complexity of its use at this point (plate 10).101 Most of these coins are tetradrachms, a few are drachms, and all have the portrait of Alexander the Great on their obverses. Alexander is characterised by long vivid hair falling far down his neck and a ram’s horn around his ear. The reverse features chest 18

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

and chair, attributes of the Roman Quaestor, a finance officer in the province’s administration, along with his name Aesillas and title (Q = Quaestor). Of Makedonian origin and thus relating to this province is the club of Herakles and the legend on the obverse reading MAKE∆ONΩN.102 The portrait of Alexander deserves closer examination for a number of reasons: it has the stylistic features of late Hellenistic art, especially a very expressive and baroque rendering of Alexander’s physiognomy. The style of the hair resembles contemporary preferences as it depicts the locks as little flames, vividly waving in the air as if the king were about to charge forward.103 There is also a chronological development in Alexander’s portrait within the 20 years or so of issue. His head is rather small and the obverse and reverse show attention to detail in earlier specimens, which is not found in later issues when his head becomes slightly larger and disjointed, and the hair now appears more schematic.104 The small size of the ram’s horn marks another difference to the portrait of Alexander on coins of Lysimachos, from which it derives in matters of typology.105 A key feature and novelty is the fact that Alexander is not wearing any kind of royal diadem. We will try to explain this remarkable circumstance later. The question of the historical background for the production of these coins and the creation and subsequent use of Alexander’s portrait is closely linked with problems of chronology and identification of the Roman magistrates involved. It appears now that the very recent work on the coinage in the name of Aesillas by R.A. Bauslaugh has provided us with a plausible answer to these delicate questions. Although we know hardly anything about a Roman official called Aesillas,106 there is a record relating to a Q. Braetius Sura, a high officer within the staff of the province’s governor Gaius Sentius Saturninus (in office c. 93–87 bc),107 dealing with the threat posed by the king of Pontos.108 In 86 bc the Romans under Sulla defeated an invading army of Mithradates VI of Pontos and drove it out of the province.109 The issues by a PR(aetor) CAE(sar?), dated by hoard evidence to a time after the one with Sura’s name,110 may indeed refer to a Roman governor in Makedonia named L. Iulius Caesar, consul of 64 bc and serving in the province a few years earlier, at around 67 bc, rather than to his namesake who was consul in 90 bc.111 Given this historical background, the character of this coinage as a provincial currency created by and issued in the name of Roman authorities, and supported by the fact that hoards including coins of the type in question circulated between c. 90 and 70 bc were mainly found in modern Bulgaria112 creates a framework for the interpretation of the function of this money and the use of Alexander’s portrait. It owed its existence to the peculiar strategic situation of Roman Makedonia and Thrace around 90 bc, which were facing the threat of an imminent attack by Mithradates VI of Pontos. The general appearance of the obverse type recalling and only slightly altering the one invented by Lysimachos (which was still very common through posthumous issues) made these new provincial issues easily acceptable to Thracian tribes. 19

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

The outer form of such a trusted type guaranteed its acceptance by these tribes. They were in a key position controlling the strategically important northern parts of the land passage along the via Egnatia terminating at the port of Neapolis. It was their support and goodwill that the Roman authorities sought when they inaugurated the Aesillas-type coins. They were used either to keep Thrace quiet by paying a subsidy or to directly pay Thracian auxiliary troops recruited for the fight against Mithradates VI. Either way this money was used to finance a battle in the name of Rome, ironically enough against an enemy who very much identified himself with Alexander the Great.113 But there is also a Makedonian perspective: Alexander was still a powerful image of national identity in his homeland and this relation was further stressed by the identification of the issuer: ‘of the Makedonians’ now appearing on the obverse. The same Alexander who had once successfully fought another Asian king would now join the Roman cause. Hence contemporary Makedonians would appreciate such a resurrection of Alexander flattering their own national pride.114 The coins of the Aesillas type thus reflect a careful choice of images and the use of a coinage created to achieve a certain objective. It is not by chance that this first Roman Alexander lacks the insignia of his royal dignity and does not wear a diadem. Alexander may have been a king and was a legend still but he now belonged to the sphere of the divine; Makedonia as a Roman province had no need for a king in the eyes of its Roman masters. So far Alexander has been presented as a symbol of legitimacy and divine support especially for early Hellenistic rulers and kings, most of whom had once themselves been close to the king, and as represented on their coins. This appreciation is quickly discontinued in the third century bc, when new evidence is given in single cases such as Ptolemaic bronzes of the second century bc, a tetradrachm of Agathokles of Baktria and the Aesillas coinage in Makedonia under the Roman republic. The great king now changes from an instrument of royal interests to one in the hands of ordinary citizens: Greek cities discover the immense propaganda potential of Alexander’s name and person. It is the civic coinage especially from the first to the third century ad that offers many representations of Alexander and related motifs. Cities emphasised their fame and age, being the eldest, most beautiful and important one in a particular region. The concept of eugeneia, being of noble descent, and being called Makedonian are key words in this challenging competition. Who could give better testimony to this claim – either legitimate or more often carefully constructed after Alexander’s death – than a known legend and founder of cities during his lifetime,115 but now (thankfully) dead? The first communities to use Alexander for his propaganda value are four cities in Kilikia:116 Alexandria, Aigeai, Epiphania and Hierapolis/Kastabala, in the region of one of Alexander’ greatest victories: Issos in 333 bc.117 Actually both the variety and the number of examples employed in this region between 20

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

the end of the Hellenistic period and down to the third century ad are surpassed only by the enormous output of related coinages by the Makedonian League in ad 218–249 (see below). Alexandria was called kat’Isson, at the Issos, in order to differentiate it from the other municipalities with the same name. It is the first city to emphasise its connection with Alexander on its money (plate 11). At some point between the early second century and c. 70 bc Alexandria issued coins depicting a head with a lion’s scalp.118 Only the enlarged features of the face derive from contemporary late Hellenistic style. Although there is no identification of Alexander’s portrait on this issue (and as we have seen above, this type actually refers to the god Herakles on Makedonian royal coinage including that of Alexander’s time) there is no doubt that contemporaries would not have hesitated to consider it a likeness of Alexander himself. This interpretation is supported by the fact that there was a literary tradition in existence from the late Hellenistic period onwards linking the foundation of this Alexandria with Alexander the Great himself.119 It has been suggested that this Herakles-type was actually in use as the official badge of this community. A surviving seal showing the head of Herakles has indeed been attributed to Alexandria kat’Isson.120 Tempting as this idea may be, one has to keep in mind that this seal displays neither the identification of the issuer nor any magistrate’s name that usually appear on official documents; it could thus be merely private. It is no surprise that in the first century ad this type121 appears on coins of Alexandria kat’Isson together with one showing the bearded and diademed head of Alexander.122 Fortunately, Alexandrian coins include not only an identification of the issuer, but also a numeral to indicate the date.123 It emerges that both types have been issued on coins of the year ad 43/44, stressing even further the very conscious use of Alexander’s portrait. This new type of a portrait of Alexander,124 depicting him with the diadem only, would be the most popular, widely circulated and prominent image of the king on civic coinages throughout the Roman period. It inaugurates a portrait whose typology is uniform in matters of attribute (diadem) and general appearance (beardless, front locks forming an anastolé); the characterisation of Alexander’s facial features, with eyes and stylistic rendering depending on each individual die-engraver; even issues within the same city from different years (see, for example, Aigeai below). Only the coinage of the Makedonian koinon and the much smaller series in Nikaia/Bithynia would succeed in maintaining a much more uniform portrait including the use of identical iconographical details and style. The appearance of another diademed Alexander can prove this assertion, too. It is nearly 200 years later that the same type is again used on coins of Alexandria in Kilikia.125 Here it is combined with the portrait of the Roman emperor Alexander Severus on the obverse. Facial features and style are again 21

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

different from early examples from this city, but even more remarkable is the poor quality of both the engraver’s work and the flan’s fabric. In addition to these portrait heads, Alexandria at the Issos also made use of a scenic representation of Alexander. Under Trajan126 and Caracalla127 a standing male figure wearing a coat around his hips and holding a spear and a bowl appears on the reverses. This scene clearly follows an established iconographic scheme depicting the founder of a city.128 This ktistes (Greek: founder) is usually shown performing the sacrifice which inaugurated the city’s foundation, often terminating in the acceptance of divine signs and omens from the gods (see, for example, Alexandria in the Troad below). It does not carry any particular detail which would allow us to identify Alexander the Great as an individual except the fact that the citizens of Alexandria in Kilikia considered him to be the founder of their city. The same scene with slight alterations appears also in Aigeai in the third century ad (see below). The way Alexandria makes use of Alexander’s portrait offers some insight into the general character of civic money especially in the Roman period. Rather than attempting a continuous annual issue, cities minted coins only when economic or financial need arose; a similar phenomenon is mirrored in the use of Alexander’s image. It was only when a city’s council decided to produce coins that the magistrate(s) responsible for this issue enjoyed the opportunity to decide on its general design from a selection of models. The second city in Kilikia to claim Alexander as its founder was Aigeai (plate 12).129 Again there is no evidence for the legitimacy of this assertion.130 However, there are several examples from the Roman period showing the general acceptance of this claim in antiquity. Aigeai – the name itself hinting at Makedonia – bears additional honorary titles granted as privileges by the emperor. Like others,131 Aigeai is called ‘Makedoniké’132 and ‘Eugenés’,133 sometimes on its coin legends. Via this mass medium, too, the city proclaimed its derivation from veterans of Alexander’s army. In addition, the legendary episode of how Alexander duped his Persian enemies by attaching torches to a herd of goats during a night attack has been transposed from Hyperesia in Achaia to Aigeai in an obvious reference to the city’s name (‘city of Goats’).134 Ancient writers are in this case supported by coin evidence, as money from Aigeai actually shows a battleworthy goat.135 Very much in contrast to its rival neighbour Alexandria, in Aigeai there is a rise in Alexanderrelated coin images in the early third century ad, most of which are issued in the time of Macrinus and his son Diadumenian.136 Early issues of the second and first centuries bc 137 present us with a youthful male head equipped with a small diadem high on his furrowed brow and again a characteristic anastolé.138 There are two main variants of this portrait to which existing dies may be attributed.139 Given these differences and keeping in mind similarities in fabric to Seleukid royal coins from Kilikian cities in this period, which bear the likeness of these rulers, we cannot be certain of the identity of the person represented.140 A portrait incorporating the main 22

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

characteristics reappears in ad 40/41, this time combined with Gaius Iulius Caesar.141 A new feature is the addition of a coat around Alexander’s neck,142 while the slightly thickened facial lines143 recall the Aesillas-type portraits. Also remarkable are the enlarged dimensions of the skull and the very small mouth.144 More telling than the portrait is the combination of Caesar’s145 and Alexander’s portrait, which also makes possible the identification of the latter: Caesar introduced a new calendar to this region, a ‘historical’ occasion which Aigeai commemorated by introducing a new era (beginning in 47/46 bc) to mark this event.146 As there is no reason to believe that the city in the first century ad should have favoured a Seleukid founder over Alexander, this coin-type seems to honour two founders, the second as a re-creator two centuries after the first. Again the same type appears under Hadrian in ad 117/118, for the first time combined with the portrait of a current emperor.147 Here the diadem is quite broad and Alexander’s head is tilted upwards, the bust now lacking its drapery. In contrast to earlier examples, the hair is now represented not by smaller, vividly curled locks but by bigger and much less wavy strands. The addition of a goat serves as the city’s badge and emphasises the link with the founding legend. The next appearance of Alexander in Aigeai does not take place until the time of Macrinus and then presumably as a part of this city’s attempts to show loyalty to the new emperor and possibly to gain privileges in return. There are three examples of Alexander’s conventional diademed portrait combined with one of Macrinus148 or more commonly Diadumenian149 on the obverse. Even the goat badge may have another appearance.150 Only the long hair on Alexander’s neck represents a new feature in the city’s coinage (we will see below that this is a feature very much attributable to contemporary preferences); the diadem has become much narrower now. These heads follow familiar dynamic iconographical tradition, neglecting facial features in favour of certain characteristics such as the anastolé.151 Interesting when compared to earlier examples from Alexandria kat’Isson is the comparable late appearance of the Herakles-type portrait – obviously resembling Alexander – in Aigeai at this stage.152 This ‘portrait’ also resembles traditions of late Hellenistic styles regarding its broad and enlarged features. It is very uncertain whether Alexander appears one more time on coins of Aigeai, now on horseback, again under Macrinus.153 The final emergence of Alexander in Aigeai took place in ad 253/254.154 Again it is his diademed head, with additions of romantic details: the fillet has moved up his forehead and his head is turned upwards. The rendering of the facial features is quite poor, largely owing to a lack of quality in fabric, workmanship and conservation. While this portrait is – rarely enough – combined with the one of an empress, the figure of Alexander as founder of Aigeai is issued with obverses depicting the emperor Aemilian himself.155 The latter type was already in use in neighbouring Alexandria 23

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

at the Issos. One detail added here is the forequarters of a bull indicating the sacrifice performed by the founder. The city gate, on the other hand, represents the community itself and one of the prominent places, where cities would represent themselves and their past through statues and monuments. Two more Kilikian cities only very occasionally made use of Alexander’s legend, and unfortunately the identification of the king is not beyond doubt.156 In both cases this takes place well before the well-attested Alexandermania of the emperors of the Severan dynasty (ad 193–235). Hence it is certainly motivated by local pride, and not (as in other communities, especially in the third century ad) partly as an expression of loyalty, too. The first type from Hierapolis (Kastabala) again depicts a beardless young king, as his diademed bust shows.157 Although there is no doubt about the royal status of the individual depicted, the identification cannot be certain as the exact chronological setting of this issue is not fixed either. If it really represents a coin-type of the first century ad, there is some reason to believe Alexander to be depicted. He would certainly be a much more famous and valuable source of identity than a Seleukid ruler.158 The portraits resemble the early one from Aigeai of the Hellenistic period in contrasting a wild mass of hair with a heavy face and an unstructured smooth physiognomy. Another issue of the second century ad in contrast uses the same conventional Alexander-type portrait,159 but again with minuscule and differentiated facial features, one die160 actually implying a veristic style. A new feature here is the increasing detail in depicting the bust. It is not only draped, but armoured, hence formulating and indicating the military virtues of the person represented. Just once in its history the city of Epiphania in Kilikia joins in with a similar coin-type combining Tyche and possibly Alexander the Great.161 The portrait of Alexander is characterised by the diadem and more prominently his rebellious front locks and furrowed brow; the mass of his hair in contrast is short and straight. Nikaia in Bithynia (plate 13) inaugurates a very uniform series of portraits of Alexander on coins minted under Marcus Aurelius (?) and Commodus; actually only a single obverse relates to M. Aurelius162 while the majority depict his son.163 It seems that the whole series originates late in the reign of Aurelius (who was emperor from ad 161–181) and overlaps into the first years of Commodus (murdered ad 192). The coins feature in most cases a portrait head of Alexander on the reverse, and two types depict a standing figure of the king.164 Alexander’s portrait165 always incorporates a number of quite uniform features: the head is circular in shape, rather small and slightly pushed forward. His front is curved and the hair falls down his neck, terminating in a number of elaborated locks. Most heads are turned to the right, only two pieces show his portrait in a profile to the left. One reverse adds a certain romantic tone as Alexander’s 24

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

head is tilted upwards, another one stresses a more vivid structure of the kings’ s hair. Alexander always wears a royal diadem. His identity is confirmed through one legend-type which actually names the king: ‘The people of Nikaia [honour] Alexander’;166 others simply name the issuer. Hence the portrait of Alexander in Nikaia stresses his royal descent by showing the diadem and characterises his virtues and dynamism through conventional indicators such as long hair, a curved front and aggressive forward movement of the head. Under Severus Alexander a single issue (one specimen known) reworks this Antonine type in Nikaia.167 Its stylistic feature, an enlarged facial structure, proportions and a heavy chin, clearly inherits contemporary preferences. It may even have been directly modelled on coins of the League of the Makedonians from this period.168 The standing figure of Alexander on the coins of Nikaia represents a feature unique within Hellenistic and Roman provincial coinages. It certainly relates to an original in sculpture.169 Of the attributes in Alexander’s hand the spear is easy to identify, but the object in his left hand remains ambiguous. In contrast to earlier terminology, it makes sense in this case to think of a thunderbolt. For this attribute we have earlier evidence,170 in the way Alexander holds this object and the fact that we are able to see that the part above and below Alexander’s hand are of equal size: this cannot be a sword. The legend conveniently identifies the individual represented and in addition formulates an act of honouring Alexander. Given the statue-like appearance of the Alexander figure on these coins, including its pose, the use of a base line and this particular legend, there is much in favour of a prototype in sculpture possibly erected by the citizens of Nikaia and consequently also represented on civic coins. Schreiber, a victim of the very positivistic approach of his time, could only think of the famous Alexander Doryphoros of Lysippos as the model for this reverse type.171 However, we have no specific detail of the appearance of this Lysippan original and it is unlikely that there actually was only a single statue of Alexander holding a spear by Lysippos.172 Instead it seems now that several such representations of Alexander in such a type were in existence.173 Alexander’s weapon would be historically correct and appropriate for a late classical original anyway. However, the thunderbolt, a solely divine attribute, is unthinkable for a statue of Lysippos, keeping in mind the contrasting attitude personified in the two artists Apelles and Lysippos in ancient sources. This particular combination of thunderbolt and spear is attested especially after Alexander’s lifetime. We might therefore prefer a middle or late Hellenistic statue-type of an Alexander holding spear and thunderbolt, the icon of the invincible god,174 inspiring the creation of such a representation in Nikaia. But why does Alexander appear in Nikaia anyway? He actually was never there, since Bithynia was not on the route his army took when campaigning in Asia Minor.175 Sources in ancient literature only very randomly connect 25

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

the king with Nikaia through veterans of his army allegedly settling there.176 A particular relationship between this city and one of the Roman emperors or Alexander, or especially the young Commodus, is not reported in any of our sources.177 When looking for an explanation we should keep in mind the rivalry between communities in the Greek East under the empire. Commodus obviously favoured Nikaia at the very beginning of his reign mainly because Nikomedia, the other important city in the region, had lost the emperor’s support.178 Nikaia may simply have benefited from its counterpart’s misfortune. Besides official acclamations and expressions of loyalty towards the imperial house on civic coins from this period,179 representing Alexander and the emperor Commodus together could be understood as a less obvious, but still powerful and flattering vehicle of civic ‘foreign’ politics. Alexandria in the Troad (plate 14) for very obvious reasons relied heavily on its relationship with Alexander in the Roman period. The city owed its present name to Lysimachos, who had it renamed in honour of Alexander around 290 bc. Only some 20 years earlier Antigonos Monophthalmos had founded the city and given it the original name of Antigoneia, when building up a network of settlements in Asia Minor to secure his control in the area.180 Under Augustus it was granted the rank and status of a Roman colony. Historically, the Alexander background is at least questionable and indirect, but was well suited to the delicate mixture of history and myth so characteristic for the historical self-assessment of Greek cities especially in the Roman period.181 Alexander was blended into a framework of earlier founding legends surrounding the prominent local sanctuary of Apollo Smintheus.182 A key witness to this local transformation of the king is the writer Menander Rhetor of the late third century ad.183 His treatise gives instructions to the orator on how to successfully perform the praise of a city. He mentions Alexandria in the Troad on several occasions when giving examples for his readers, thus offering an insight into the historio-mythological constructs of founding legends. It is only through his writing that two very prominent and frequently depicted scenes on reverses of bronze coins from Alexandria in the Troad in the second and third centuries ad have been finally identified: the first shows a horseman closing in on the ancient statue of the god Apollo,184 the second this warrior on foot performing sacrifice on a tripod in front of the same statue, and sometimes an eagle is flying above carrying the head of a bull.185 For Menander Rhetor it was very clear that Alexandria had been given its name from Alexander the Great himself, hence he considered the king to be the city’s founder. Menander also tells the story of how Alexander came to the sanctuary of Apollo when successfully invading Asia. Allegedly Alexander received an omen from the god, telling him where to found the new city.186 This report is perfectly mirrored in these two scenes. Alexander is given the signs to build a new city by the god as shown on the first type and sacrifices a bull on the occasion of his foundation. The eagle carrying this bull’s 26

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

head – a familiar feature187 in these founding legends – will drop its load in fulfilment of the divine will at the very spot where the new city will be situated. Alexandria hence considered this legend a very important part of its self-representation, which was also aiming at its neighbours in this region. The large number of coins with founding types (including those without Alexander) accounts for a remarkable proportion of the total number implied on this city’s money. More conventional designs usually emphasising the status of a Roman colony (e.g. a ploughing founder, Marsyas, she-wolf and Roman twins, Tyche/Fortuna or a genius carrying a statuette of Apollo) are much scarcer.188 Hence Alexandria in the Troad offers a telling example of the intensive use and transformation of local myth and history, certainly not by coincidence from the Antonine period onwards, which saw the rise of the second sophistic. The incorporation of Alexander into a local founding legend and its detailed scenic depiction make this case a remarkable one.189 In comparison to post-Hellenistic Alexandria in the Troad, Smyrna in Ionia was a truly ancient community and claimed Theseus, Pelops and Tantalos as its founders.190 But its recent reinstallation around 300 bc was also the source of some confusing traditions reported by ancient writers. Strabo grants (quite correctly) the refoundation of Symrna to Antigonos the One-eyed and Lysimachos, while Aelius Aristides also names Alexander the Great himself.191 Pausanias 7.5.2 finally tells the story of Alexander falling asleep under a plane tree and having a dream in which the two Nemeseis of Smyrna tell him to (re-)found the city. An illustration of this very legend is represented on the reverses of some coins of Smyrna in c. ad 147192 and 242–249 under Gordianus III193 and Philip the Arab194 respectively (plate 15). His weapons and a bull’s head195 add further details. Again Alexander is incorporated into local traditions, in our case accompanied by these two goddesses, who so prominently feature in the city’s coinage in general.196 The composition of this scene appears somewhat odd and unbalanced, presumably because the two Nemeseis as a group of their own were simply copied into this scene as their design was already well established; they seem not really to communicate with the figure of the sleeping Alexander.197 His iconography on the other hand is influenced by representations of Ariadne sleeping and holding her arm above her head in a very similar way.198 This scene therefore presents itself as a very artificial design blending already existing iconographic and literary traditions into a representation of the sophistic customs of city praise and a carefully constructed framework of myth and history so much favoured in the Antonine period. Unfortunately there is no information given on any particular reason for this sudden use of Alexander’s legend in Smyrna around ad 147. A few years later the famous orator Aelius Aristides would compare the emperors M. Aurelius and Commodus with Alexander and Theseus, hailing them as even more prominent founders compared with the latter two for having helped the city after a disastrous earthquake in ad 177. The first appearance of Alexander in 27

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

Symrna, though, took place under Antoninus Pius on coins with the portrait of the Caesar M. Aurelius on the obverse.199 The younger emperor hence is assimilated to Alexander, while civic coins showing Antoninus Pius bear the image of the older founder Pelops on their reverse.200 Four cities of the former Dekapolis201 – Kapitolias, Gerasa, Pella and Dion – claimed Alexander as their founder.202 Of these only Kapitolias and Gerasa issued coins with representations of Alexander. An issue of Kapitolias203 around ad 190204 (plate 16) has a legend referring to Alexander combined with a remarkable portrait-bust of the king. Alexander is called the Makedonian and founder of the city,205 hence stressing twice the eugeneia (noble descent) of Kapitolias. The use of the term Genarches (progenitor) instead of the more common Ktistes (founder) need not be a weaker version of the usual legal term and hence point to a contemporary awareness of the fact that Kapitolias, like its neighbours, was in fact never visited by Alexander or founded on his personal orders.206 Alexander’s portrait is less important in terms of its physiognomic features (though it lacks the common royal diadem)207 – we can observe a rather characteristic style of portraiture and die-cutting in general within the Dekapolis and in some cases even an assimilation to the emperor’s portrait208 – but because of the singular choice of type of representation. Alexander wears elaborate drapery, whose rich ornaments took a good part of the dieengraver’s attention. Horizontal and vertical stripes indicate careful and costly decoration of the drapery with embroidery and colours. W. Kellner209 interpreted this coat as the royal garments of the Persian emperor. Consequently Alexander would be represented in the costume of his former enemy and predecessor as the ruler of Asia. And this coin-type of the Roman period would give evidence of the use of parts of the Persian costume by Alexander as reported by ancient sources.210 But there is another explanation for this extraordinary depiction of Alexander. It need not be a reference to his choice of royal garments as early as 500 years before this coin was issued. It may, on the contrary, originate from a much more general convention of how contemporaries in the Roman period and in these oriental surroundings felt a king and ruler should be represented. Indeed, equipping a ruler with such ornamented garments has contemporary parallels in this region: the Parthian king, himself in many ways a successor of the Persian emperor, represents a valuable comparison. On his coins he wears very similar clothes. One may assume that the important centre of trade in this region, Palmyra, mediated such appreciation and models of ruler-portraits originating from the east.211 While claiming especially Greek or Makedonian origins by using Alexander’s portrait and his name respectively, by depicting a non-Greek piece of clothing, whether the Great King’s costume or more probably one inspired by contemporary models, our coins give evidence of a very characteristic and regional aspect of blending different cultures.212 28

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

It is also very characteristic of the authority responsible for the selection of legends and design of this coin-type to make use of the unique title of Genarches213 again a few years later and to choose a portrait that does without the usual diadem. Combined this time with a portrait of Geta on the obverse, this representation of Alexander on a reverse is resumed around ad 205.214 A very rare coin-type (plate 18) gives evidence of an official treaty of homonoia (concord and friendship) between two cities in this region.215 The obverse portrait of Geta matches a reverse of two warriors in full armour, whose names are given by the legend: Alexander and Seleukos.216 On the other hand, as the coin does not give the names of the cities in question, only the style comparable to the one found in the Dekapolis217 and the historical background of the individuals named help us to locate this bronze. Two founderfigures shaking hands very obviously indicate an official homonoia (although the term does not appear in the legend), and the motif of shaking hands, the dextrarum iunctio, is frequently found, for example, on contemporary Roman imperial coins.218 We indeed know of two cities matching our two founders. The citizens of Abila in the Dekapolis claimed Seleukos I, the first king of the Seleukid dynasty, to be their ktistes.219 A close neighbour of Abila is Kapitolias again, whose coins with portraits of Alexander we already saw.220 Hence our two warriors, now representatives of a glorious past, are announcing peace and concord between their two cities, Abila and Kapitolias.221 In stark contrast to these varying images the following portraits of Alexander on coins from Gerasa under Septimius Severus,222 Caracalla223 (plate 17) and Elagabalus224 are more conventional and represent a portraittype of Alexander with the royal diadem familiar on coins at least from the first century ad onwards. The legends of earlier examples call Alexander a Makedonian and founder (ktistes)225 of the city, but later issues under Elagabalus only stress his Makedonian origin. At least the latter coins also seem to indicate some kind of assimilation between the portrait of the emperor and one of Alexander.226 Individual dies, however, differ in various details from the portraits represented: some stress a more expressive variant with heavy chin and a foreshortened profile, while others feature a calmer physiognomy.227 Another coin-type of Gerasa of the Antonine period has also been interpreted as a representation of Alexander, but there remains considerable doubt about this identification.228 The reverses feature a draped male figure standing with spear and sometimes also a sceptre, obviously the founder of the city, behind the city goddess Tyche who holds a rudder and cornucopia. Below this group appears a river god, in this case that of the nearby River Chrysoroas. Although we know of Alexander as the alleged founder of Gerasa and have encountered his portraits on the city coins, there is one strong argument against this identification. All coins in question with this scene are combined with obverses which do not employ the usual name of the city, Gerasa,229 but a Hellenised version: the city here is called by its characteristic 29

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

dynastic name Antiochia on the Chrysoroas, thus stressing a Seleukid background.230 This scene is hence more likely to refer to the re-foundation under Antiochus III after his conquest of this region around 200 bc.231 Also another coin from Abila232 does not show Alexander’s portrait. H. Seyrig233 suggested that the bust of young man in full armour be called Alexander. Spijkerman234 even identified a single bull’s horn growing up from the head and related it to Alexander. But as we saw above, there is no information on a tradition of Alexander as the founder of this city.235 There is on the other hand some evidence for Seleukid activity in Abila, and such a bull’s horn raised upright is more prominent with Seleukos I than with Alexander (who appears with the curved ram’s horn of Zeus Ammon instead, see plate 8). It is therefore more reasonable to identify this warrior as Seleukos I and not Alexander.236 Apollonia Mordiaion in Pisidia (plate 19) represents yet another example of a city claiming Alexander as its ktistes,237 again with no evidence from modern research or ancient sources.238 As before in Kilikia and Baktria the design is taken from coins issued in the lifetime of Alexander the Great featuring Herakles wearing a lion-scalp headdress.239 Fortunately the obverse legends name Alexander as the founder of this city, securing this identification. The stylistic feature of this disguised Alexander has its roots in lifetime types rather than posthumous ones, since flame-like locks and an enlarged physiognomy so characteristic of the latter are lacking. Hans von Aulock was able to provide some indication of the time of production of these pseudoautonomous coins (lacking the emperor’s portrait) with the help of one reverse combined with an obverse representation of Caracalla in the city’s coinage.240 This one dates from ad 198–217, i.e. the reign of Caracalla as Augustus. It may be narrowed by taking into account the portrait-type of this particular obverse: this beardless portrait of Caracalla was in use only until c. ad 208. In addition the city’s coinage with representations of Septimius Severus and Geta all falls into the period before ad 209, thus favouring the production of these Apollonian Alexander-coins in the years between ad 198 and c. 208. Such a date would indeed allow a possible explanation of their issue in connection with a visit by the imperial family in ad 202.241 Civic authorities would therefore have followed the contemporary habit of flattering the emperor and expressing their allegiance by issuing this series of coins. The case of Caesarea ad Libanum/Arka (plate 20) is rather a weak one regarding the potential identification of a representation of Alexander. Our only evidence is the often unreliable Historia Augusta (chapters 5.1; 13.1), which reports the circumstances of the birth of the future emperor Severus Alexander in this city, drawing parallels to his famous namesake Alexander the Great. Unfortunately place and date of this event are obviously wrong, as well as many of the alleged similarities between the two individuals having been created post eventu.242 But the festival in honour of Alexander, which is mentioned in this episode, might have existed in this community (now a 30

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

Roman colony), thus giving evidence of the veneration of Alexander in the early third century ad.243 Some reverse scenes of civic coins with portraits of Elagabalus244 and Severus Alexander245 featuring a figure crowning the city’s Tyche may therefore show the founder honouring his new settlement, who in this case would be Alexander himself.246 For a similar scene on coins of Gerasa see above. In the third century ad, the bronze coinage of the Koinon of Makedonia, the political body formed by representatives from the whole of this Roman province, presents a unique wealth and variety of Alexander-related images thus making it the most intensive translation of Alexander’s person and deeds of all in ancient numismatics. To these we must add civic money with identical images, but in smaller quantities issued by the city of Beroia itself, where this assembly of the Makedonian League took place.247 From ad 218, the reign of Elagabalus (died ad 222), onwards down to Philip the Arab (ad 244–249),248 when provincial coinage as a whole terminated, the emperor’s portrait on the front is almost totally superseded249 by a large number of various head and bust-types representing Alexander the Great (plate 21). H. Gaebler established a chronological sequence of issues a century ago, which is still valid, based on die combinations and the numbering of the neocorate (temple warden) title on the reverse; only very few civic coins of Beroia bear dates of the Actian era.250 And the reverses, too, feature among agonistic and national Makedonian types representation of Alexander (plate 22) and interestingly enough also of his mother Olympias (plate 23). There are as many as ten obverse-types of Alexander and at least as many major reverse ones, not counting variants.251 Of special interest are some elaborated scenes which are otherwise known from later Roman contorniates and contemporary gold medallions and hence are linked with these groups.252 Each of the Koinon obverses and reverses in general seems to be interchangeable with each other, limited only through denominational regulations and chronological evolution of types. Very remarkable, too, is the uniform style and appearance of Alexander’s portrait within this coinage maintained over a period of 30 years. The coin obverses in question exclusively feature heads or busts of Alexander together with a legend giving Alexander’s name (in most cases in the genitive form AΛEΞAN∆POY).253 Types with divine attributes such as the ram’s horn (G),254 based on the model provided by coins of Lysimachos, and the one (D)255 taken from Alexander’s own ones depicting Herakles, with the king wearing a lion-scalp headdress, are extant, but only in very small numbers;256 another rare type (J)257 varies this representation by enlarging it to show the full bust. The majority of portraits depict Alexander again as a beardless, hence youthful, king, wearing a royal diadem, characterised by long hair and an expressive physiognomy. One type shows his long hair falling on his neck (A),258 while another (B259 to right, C260 to left) adds a new feature: in these cases Alexander’s hair is flying in the wind. In contrast to an earlier example, the coins in the name of Aesillas (plate 10), here all the strands are parallel. 31

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

This particular characteristic is known only from this group of coins from the Severan period, contemporary gold medallions (plate 26) and later contorniates (plate 28). There is sufficient reason to consider this feature an invention of the early third century ad, modernising already existing representations of Alexander. Another type (E)261 has never been recorded before, showing the king wearing an Attic helmet, often decorated with a snake, griffin and sometimes with more complex battle scenes.262 Again there are similar portraits on gold medallions (plate 27). Finally there are three subsequent bust-types, portraying Alexander’s military virtue by equipping him with his armour, spear or shield; these always present the king without a helmet, but wearing his diadem and like type A stressing his long hair.263 The reverses on the other hand always represent whole scenes, often with minor variations in detail.264 Some show Alexander on horseback carrying a spear, occasionally a snake, or a dog below his mount.265 Some change this type into a hunting or battle scene by adding a lion or a doomed foe.266 The representation of a warrior figure holding a spear and also his sword (parazonium) upside down267 certainly relates to Alexander268 and may derive from an earlier piece of sculpture. Its iconography focuses on the military virtues of Alexander, the warrior king, who had already won the war and now has secured eternal peace.269 The same figure appears on coins, where it is represented on top of a column between the two neocorate temples of Beroia.270 This latter example makes it very clear that such a monument has been erected in honour of Alexander in this city.271 The same warrior appears also seated, either to his right272 or left.273 Alexander’s legendary deeds are portrayed by the depiction of the famous episode which reports the young prince taming his horse Boukephalos,274 which was given to him by his father Philip II (Plutarch, Alexander 6.5).275 Another much rarer, but less dynamic variation276 of this topic proved to be less appreciated and soon was abandoned as it lacked the romantic dynamism of the more common depiction.277 Taming a horse no man had been able to manage foretold Alexander’s future successes, as Philip allegedly told Alexander to find a kingdom of his own as Makedonia finally had proven to small (the whole story was certainly made up after the event). This playing with legendary stories is also a motive in the depiction of yet another famous incident. Alexander’s origins had very early been shifted to the divine sphere during his lifetime by claiming Zeus Ammon, the god of the oracle at Siwah, as his father. Olympias, Alexander’s mother, plays a crucial part in these legends, kept alive in various literary traditions as for example told in the Alexander Romance.278 It is hence no wonder that Alexander’s home country transformed this legend into a representation on its provincial coinage: Olympias resting on her bed awaits and greets Zeus Ammon, who has come to her in the shape of a serpent.279 The images of Alexander on the front and back of this group of coins thus mirror the need of the contemporary Makedonian authorities to recall the 32

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

glorious events of the past.280 To do so a number of portrait-types of Alexander are in use, each designed to stress especially the king’s dynamism and military virtue. Less appreciated, though, are solely divine representations. The reverse depictions follow this same objective, but their character as scenic representations allow much more elaborated illustrations stressing various aspects of Alexander’s character and personality. In particular they present themselves as numismatic transformations of the very popular and contemporary stories and legends surrounding Alexander in literary sources. The historical background for the existence of these Alexander images on the coins of the Makedonian league is provided by the existence of agonistic festivals, games and competitions in honour of Alexander.281 Although there may have been some games in existence at an earlier stage, epigraphic evidence especially from honorary and sepulchral inscriptions naming athletes and magistrates involved in these festivals is available from ad 229 onwards.282 These festivals were called Alexandreia, thus identifying the person commemorated, and seem to have taken place on an annual basis together with the imperial cult in Beroia itself. At some point these Alexander games were even given the privilege of bearing the title of an Olympiad, thus enjoying the prestige, procedures and rank of the famous games at the sanctuary of Zeus in Olympia/Greece.283 This new interest in Alexander seems to originate from the reign of Elagabalus as under him the coinage of the Makedonian Koinon inaugurates its representations of Alexander. It makes sense to understand this new veneration of Alexander the Great as a part of Elagabalus’ claim for legitimacy as he presented himself as the alleged offspring of Caracalla, whose veneration of Alexander was notorious. Elagabalus selected the right place as the Makedonians’ love for Alexander provided him with the necessary logistics and traditions at their place of assembly. In the case of his successor Severus Alexander (reigned ad 222–235), who supported these festivals even more keenly, we can draw on the same motivations: he again claimed Caracalla as his father and possessed a remarkable tradition of links with Alexander himself.284 The Pisidian city of Sagalassos (plate 24) links itself with Alexander the Great only once in its entire history. This is remarkable as it occurs not only very late, but more or less at a point when civic money in general terminates around ad 270.285 Sagalassos does not immediately claim Alexander as its founder, but uses a more indirect approach mirroring the historical events nearly 600 years earlier. Alexander indeed took Sagalassos by storm in the spring of 333 bc after defeating a Pisidian army in the vicinity.286 This belligerent episode is represented on one issue with the portrait of the emperor Claudius Gothicus (ad 268–270) on the obverse.287 Here Alexander, identified by the reverse legend, charges to the right, next to him stands Zeus, and to the right a Pisidian warrior on foot. At first sight this looks like a depiction of Alexander’s violent capture of Sagalassos and the defeat of the native army. But the message of this reverse goes much further. 33

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

Contemporary citizens in the third century ad were no longer descendants of Alexander’s former Pisidian foes, but of Greek colonists who settled in Sagalassos only later in the Hellenistic period.288 And like the native inhabitants, too, these could have hardly any interest in commemorating solely a defeat their city suffered (even) at the hands of Alexander and his army. A positive connotation is provided, if one understands this scene in the context of iconographical types in use on ancient coins.289 Similar compositions are also found with a scene featuring the founder-hero of a community coming ashore.290 This stereotype iconography is exactly copied by the ‘fleeing’ Pisidian on the right. He is therefore not escaping from the presence of gods, but very much in contrast taking the lead, and is bringing forward Alexander and his army with the divine assistance of Zeus himself. In this new perspective the Pisidians change sides from the defeated to associates of the king,291 just as their contemporary ‘descendants’ affiliated themselves to the emperor and his army. The complexity of the scene represented and especially the Zeus figure may actually represent a statue group erected in Sagalassos. The Zeus is based on the type of the Lateran Poseidon, a famous work of the late fourth century bc by the sculptor Lysippos.292 However, it remains very debatable whether this group is based on a Hellenistic original itself or, instead, is a contemporary creation of the third century ad exclusively for use as a coin-reverse. Caracalla (sole emperor from ad 212–217) is the only Roman emperor whose personal relationship to and veneration of Alexander the Great are visually communicated in civic and other coinages. Rare variants of regular coins from Caesarea in Kappadokia, Heliopolis in Roman Syria, and some of the gold medallions from Aboukir combine the obverse bust of Caracalla with a depiction of Alexander on the emperor’s shield (plate 25). The bust-type of Caracalla holding shield and spear in a characteristic pose itself already represents an example of the iconographic tradition of imitating Alexander.293 In Caracalla’s case this expressive bust and its message are reinforced by actually using Alexander himself as a shield device:294 a bronze coin from Caesarea of ad 197295 features a shield device characteristically different from the conventional head of Medusa296 usually depicted there. Here it is the head of a young male with his hair flowing in the wind, a representation which, especially in the light of the examples below, can be identified only as Alexander the Great. Another coin from Caracalla’s sole rule was minted in Syrian Heliopolis and dates from ad 215–217.297 The same heroic pose now features a more mature Caracalla. He is equipped with a shield which again shows a youthful head with flaming hair, now combined with a more elaborated scene: a human figure is trying to catch a horse moving to the left. It is very clear that this scene recalls the famous episode of Alexander taming his horse Bukephalos, a representation on coins known only from the Koinon of the Makedonians. The ideological content is very obvious, and not only commemorates a heroic past but clearly parallels the rulers of present and 34

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

past. The same prophecy that ‘foretold’ Alexander’s future deeds has been transferred to Caracalla.298 And the same imitation of Alexander is once again portrayed on two gold medallions from the Aboukir hoard.299 Here Caracalla also carries a shield with a representation of Alexander, this time featuring the king on horseback hunting a lion. This scene is also known from two of the medallions from the Tarsos hoard, and from similar pieces in Cambridge and bronze coins from the Makedonian Koinon.300 Again Alexander’s virtue is the topic and subject of imperial veneration. For the function, date and historical background of these enigmatic pieces see below. D. Salzmann was able to link these numismatic testimonies with literary sources on Caracalla’s infatuation with Alexander. In quantities previously unknown in antiquity there are reports of Caracalla venerating the memory of Alexander and imitating him.301 Even more important, by the coin from Caesarea this imperial Alexandermania is now already dated before Caracalla’s sole rule as emperor.302 Though not issued by the emperor himself, but in the name of a city, the coins from Caesarea and Heliopolis give evidence of local reactions to imperial preferences and politics, not known from sculpture in the round or from imperial money.303 The historical background for Caracalla’s imitation of Alexander certainly is the contemporary military situation on Rome’s eastern frontier. As his father Septimius Severus waged war against the Parthians in ad 197/198, so did Caracalla himself in ad 215– 217, an enemy traditionally paralleled with Alexander’s Persian foes.304 It is possible that the first impetus actually came from Septimius Severus himself, who won his decisive victory in ad 194 against his internal rival for the Roman throne, Pescennius Niger, at Issos in Kilikia, the location of Alexander’s victory over Dareios in 333 bc.305 A development such as the one proposed would also provide an explanation for the growing number of heroic bust-types with shield and spear on coins of Septimius Severus.306 On the other hand, we have still to ask whether this depiction of Alexander on shields carried by Caracalla actually proves the use of armour and objects of Alexander by Caracalla, as sources report,307 or simply is the consequence and iconographic formulation of Caracalla’s imitation of Alexander. Much more prominent on these precious gold medallions than the impostor Caracalla, however, is the original himself. Alexander and members of his family feature in various roles and poses on front and back of the enigmatic numismatic objects (plates 26–27). In 1863308 the first hoard surfaced near Tarsos in ancient Kilikia, now modern Turkey. It included three huge gold medallions, 23 Roman aurei minted between ad 72 and 243, and one gold multiple309 of Alexander Severus from ad 230, four bars of gold, two equally golden tintinnabula (bells),310 and finally amulets of gold and lapis lazuli. Of these 23 gold coins the majority (16 pieces) come from the period of ad 198–217,311 hence letting us 35

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

assume that this hoard was assembled during the third century ad and buried at the beginning of reign of Emperor Gordianus III or the rise of his successor Philip the Arab around ad 244. About the exact finding place and its archaeological context we know very little, as the hoard passed through many hands on its immediate way to the centre of contemporary art trade, Paris, and from there into the collection of Count Tyskiewicz. He gave them – at the invitation of Emperor Napoleon III – to their present keeper, the Cabinet des Médailles in Paris in 1868.312 They were found in the superstructures of some ancient building313 in the plains around Tarsos, but we know neither the exact find-spot, nor any details of the character of its hiding place and the circumstances of its deposition. The obverse portraits on these medallions314 show Alexander himself, wearing a diadem in his hair, which moves romantically in the wind (again similar to bronze coins of the Makedonian Koinon), another representation of Alexander, again as Herakles with the scalp of a lion and one of a bearded mature man with a diadem. The latter is most likely to be identified as Alexander’s father Philip II,315 of whom unfortunately no securely identified portraits have survived.316 The suggestion, made a century ago, that this portrait should be regarded as an idealised one of Caracalla is not convincing.317 Unfortunately for its supporters, this ‘Caracalla’ lacks any similarities with authenticated portraits of this emperor, something not possible in regard with the high level of typology inherited in Roman imperial portraiture.318 As Philip himself never wore the diadem, which only his son introduced into the royal garments, the portrait most certainly is either a Hellenistic or Roman re-creation of a representation of King Philip.319 Representing Philip would make sense as it emphasises Alexander’s royal descent – even though the famous legend of the god Zeus Ammon and Alexander’s mother Olympias relegated his human father to second place. Another object of the Roman period, the so-called Chigi shield, very much stresses Alexander’s descent from a royal couple and makes the king himself say: ‘Through my father Philip I was born of the line of the deified Herakles, grandson of Zeus, and born of the line of Achilles through my mother Olympias.’320 The hoard of Aboukir was discovered in February or March 1902 near the town of that name in the delta of the Nile and equally quickly dispersed in trade.321 We have no information on the character of its hiding place. Presumably the quantity of about 600 (or more) Roman aurei322 from Alexander Severus to Constantius I, 18–20 bars and 20 Alexander medallions formed a remarkable collection of ancient gold.323 The composition of the aurei suggests that the material was buried at the beginning of the fourth century ad at the latest.324 Unfortunately there remains some doubt as to whether the Roman aurei, gold bars and the Alexander medallions were really part of the same single hoard.325 The obverse portraits on these medallions feature Alexander in several representations.326 There is one portrait-type with the ram’s horn of Zeus 36

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

Ammon taken from the prototypes of Lysimachos, other specimens show him wearing a helmet, and a spectacular one with a bust of Alexander en face with a spear and holding a shield decorated with a zodiac. The reverses, too, relate to Alexander’s military virtues and divine descent by showing scenes of the king being given his weapons, Alexander hunting either on foot or on horseback,327 another royal virtue, with his horse Boukephalos or in a triumphal pose riding in a chariot.328 Some medallions suggest a connection with Alexander’s mother Olympias. Either they feature her veiled portrait,329 or they try to establish a mythological parallel to the nereid Thetis, the mother of Alexander’s idol Achilles. As she cared for her son and made Hephaistos, the gods’ smith, produce his weapons, Olympias cared for Alexander. This is the background explaining scenes with a nereid riding on a sea creature. Some details such as the Alexander portraits with a helmet, those with his hair waving horizontally in the wind and the peculiarly bent diadem have parallels in the bronze coinage of the Makedonian League of the third century ad. The appearance of Caracalla on some medallions offers an additional date of c. ad 210 as a terminus post quem. Because there is no related evidence from Makedonia under Caracalla, famous though he may be for his veneration of Alexander, but only from Elagabalus (reigned ad 218–222) onwards, it would make sense to understand these medallions as precious representations of Alexander’s legend against the background of the veneration of Alexander in Makedonia and the games held there in his honour (see above) in the ad 220s and 230s, the times of Elagabalus and Severus Alexander. They were the only emperors to claim Caracalla as their alleged father and possess a record of venerating Alexander the Great.330 One might think that they were given to visitors, magistrates, or athletes of these Alexander festivals on the occasion of their visit.331 Alexander appears for the last time in Rome itself.332 During the late fourth and fifth centuries ad a group of bronze medallions bear witness to a colourful commemoration of past and present (plate 28).333 These medallions are today called contorniates from the Italian word for their peculiar incised rims; neither are they coins nor did they have any monetary function. Contorniates were distributed mainly through private individuals and enterprises as gifts on New Year’s Day.334 Scenes from the world of the Roman circus (e.g. the Circus Maximus and chariot-drivers), Greek and Roman poets and philosophers, and famous Roman emperors mirror the longing of parts of the Roman population for a glorious and pagan past. It is no wonder to find Alexander and his mother Olympias incorporated into these products of memory and longing, and identified by Greek or Latin legends. In Alexander’s case it is the first time he is actually called ‘The Great’ on numismatic objects or coins.335 Alexander is shown again as Herakles, or wearing a diadem, and on horseback, too. All these representations are already familiar especially from coins of the third century ad regarding their 37

IMAGES OF ALEXANDER

portrait-types. In addition these contorniates not only use earlier designs, but also in some cases transform them into contemporary styles. And again Olympias appears in the famous episode with the serpent of Zeus Ammon; this time she is explicitly named as queen in the legend. Contorniates therefore very much visualise the contemporary appreciation of Alexander and his legend. The use of his image is motivated not only by his prominence, but also in the appreciation of Alexander as an icon and symbol of good fortune.336 It is fascinating to realise that some of the images put on to these contorniates have their origins in the same designs as the bronze coinage from Makedonia and the gold medallions from Tarsos and Aboukir.337

38

2 MAN, KING, HERO AND GOD: ALEXANDER’S CHANGING PORTRAITS This chapter deals with the development of various portrait-types representing Alexander on specific coins. The material is presented in typological order, so that the main types are discussed in sequence and within each type in chronological order. A special focus is placed on the relationship of portrait-types from the imperial period to their Hellenistic predecessors.

Alexander as Herakles wearing a lion’s scalp The discussion is limited to those examples which provide convincing reasons for an identification as Alexander either through their legend or because they originate from a city with a tradition of claiming Alexander as its founder.1 Agathokles of Baktria presents us with the first authenticated example of Alexander in the guise of Herakles, conveniently identified as ‘Alexander, son of Philip’ by the coin’s legend. Later coins are exclusively civic, but often lack any identifying inscriptions. At Alexandria kat’Isson such a Herakles/Alexander appears at some point in the second and first centuries bc for the first time and emerges again in ad 43/44. Its neighbour Aigeai makes use of this type only very late, in ad 217/18, again without any explicit identification, but this community’s pedigree and especially the use of honorary titles referring to Makedonian origins and the king himself support an identification as Alexander. More or less contemporary are coins from Apollonia Mordiaion of the early third century ad, this time claiming Alexander as the city’s founder. The Makedonian Koinon presents us with a number of such examples, also naming the king in person. It is here that, with type J according to the order established in AMNG, under Gordianus III for the first time this portrait is shown developed into a full bust.2 This coinage shows in particular how famous and how much appreciated this blending of Alexander and Herakles was in the imperial period and in Alexander’s homeland. In contrast to the much scarcer image with ram’s horn, this Herakles-type is the only one elaborating Alexander’s divine background and used in considerable numbers, but still not close 39

MAN, KING, HERO AND GOD

to those of the diademed portrait-type;3 one medallion from the Tarsos hoard is similar. In all these cases – with the exception of Agathokles of Baktria, where contemporary styles take over – coins issued during Alexander’s lifetime with the head of Herakles on the obverse were used as a model. It is quite likely that die-engravers actually used such coins when preparing new dies for contemporary issues. Both Hellenistic and especially imperial period civic coinages refuse to rely on Hellenistic transformations and styles, possibly mirroring a contemporary disregard for, and lack of appreciation of, this particular period.4 Only the Herakles/Alexander of Agathokles of Baktria clearly shows its roots in contemporary posthumous Alexander coins of the developed Hellenistic period. Summing up, it must be pointed out how few examples that combine Herakles and Alexander in general are extant on ancient coins. It seems that other types were more attractive and appreciated by royal and civic authorities. Only in late antiquity does the isolated group of contorniates give evidence of the popularity of the Herakles-type, although that certainly is not an exclusive representation of Alexander either. Thirteen obverse dies show a growing interest in this type, possibly due to the fact that lifetime coins of Alexander were still circulating in higher circles of Roman society as objects of curiosity. Interestingly, certain changes have taken place. While some dies are again obviously based on lifetime coins, others transform this type into contemporary elongated styles characteristic of the fourth and fifth centuries ad. In one case a club is added to the obverse. The most important difference, however, is the change from a head to a bust type: like one example from the Makedonian Koinon and one Tarsos medallion, all such representations on contorniates prefer to show the upper body of this Herakles/Alexander and thus differ substantially from their prototypes. It is necessary also to mention a phenomenon that confused contemporaries and, even more, modern scholarship. The examples mentioned above, and especially the case of the Baktrian tetradrachms, make it clear that at some point in history the beardless head or bust of Herakles with the scalp of a lion was actually considered to represent the likeness of Alexander the Great, though formally maintaining every single iconographical characteristic of Herakles. From the Diadochi onwards a ruler’s portrait actually did appear on the obverse of royal coins, and hence it was logical to take the head of Herakles as a portrait of Alexander from this time onwards, especially as the legend gave Alexander’s name, too.5 This understanding is quite widespread among early modern and some contemporary scholars.6 A number of works on Alexander claimed and also tried to prove that already in Alexander’s lifetime, not only posthumously, the image of Herakles on the obverse of his silver and bronze coins was intended to portray the king and not the god. This hypothesis in particular claims that during Alexander’s 40

MAN, KING, HERO AND GOD

reign the representation of Herakles would gradually change into one of Alexander’s likeness; the king’s face with romantic and more individual features would take over from the god: because the practice of representing a living person on coins, in our case the king, was neither familiar nor accepted in the time before and during the reign of Alexander,7 he would have chosen a kind of crypto-portrait for himself, hence still satisfying Greek iconographical and cultural traditions.8 Following this opinion the coins of c. 326–323 bc testify to such a development. Although there is no doubt that such images of Herakles with the scalp of a lion were posthumously (at least from the second century bc onwards) actually taken as portraits of Alexander, we have to be very careful in transferring later notions and understanding into Alexander’s lifetime. In addition, possible examples in sculpture of Alexander with a lion’s scalp, such as the Alexander sarcophagus, are also posthumous.9 There is even an iconographical tradition of a beardless young Herakles wearing a lion’s scalp which pre-dates Alexander in Makedonian coinage.10 And it is also very true that in Alexander’s lifetime the depiction of an individual ruler was still not accepted in Greek coinage.11 Alexander’s new Herakles/Zeus (in silver) and Athena/Nike (in gold) coinage in contrast very much stress divine support and panhellenic traditions, actually avoiding any relation to exclusively Makedonian topics and especially to any notions of kingship and domination.12 As we agree that Alexander’s own coinage represents an official document of the king’s authority and his political agenda, we would expect that a major change such as the appearance of his own portrait would happen at the same time and in every single royal mint under his control. What some consider individual, meaning features of Alexander himself on royal coins in the late 320s bc, is instead found only with single dies and never in whole issues and at the same point in time, but resulting from gradual and slow stylistic changes.13 If Alexander had wanted his own portrait on coins, this phenomenon would have to be a uniform one, taking place in all official mints and at the same time. In addition one would think that if Alexander actually had put his own portrait on his royal coinage, he would have made it entirely unambiguous and selected a clearly recognisable representation or type. For a king, like any ruler or authority, it simply makes no sense to hide behind an earlier image or design and take the risk of being mistaken for somebody else. Today, at least among numismatists, this attractive, but incorrect, hypothesis has finally been laid to rest.14 To conclude this debate: the Herakles on the coins issued in Alexander’s lifetime is indeed Herakles, and no one else. After Alexander’s death, however, with the earliest testimony given by the pedigree coins of Agathokles in the early second century bc, but possibly occurring much earlier (during the first half of the third century bc), contemporaries took the god as a representation of the dead king.

41

MAN, KING, HERO AND GOD

Alexander wearing an elephant’s scalp This portrait-type goes back to a design developed at Ptolemy’s court around 320 bc and is, with a few exceptions, geographically exclusively limited to Egypt. A derivative of this type is represented by a rare issue of Agathokles of Syracuse. Seleukos I, on the other hand, remodels Ptolemy’s invention and puts it into use only briefly in c. 300 bc. He modifies this type by leaving out the connection to Zeus Ammon (taking away the ram’s horn), but follows Ptolemy’s earlier design of before c. 316 bc (not the contemporary one still in use in Egypt around 300 bc). After this rather brief existence the elephant-type, though it was prominent in Ptolemy’s case and is still much appreciated today, plays virtually no role from the third century bc onwards. It disappears from Ptolemaic bronzes, where it represents only one of several coin images, during the mid-second century bc, without ever being adapted to any civic coinage, whether from the Hellenistic or Roman period. And Alexander’s fellow countrymen in Makedonia of the third century ad prefer very different designs. Even the high level of interest in Alexander in late antiquity, as represented by the contorniates, never makes any use of his portrait with the elephant scalp.

Alexander with ram’s horn and (mostly) diademed The first representations of Alexander with a fillet are again to be found under Ptolemy I on two types of bronze coins. These locally restricted coins first feature Alexander with short hair, then with longer hair and a ram’s horn. In both cases his headdress is not yet the royal diadem, but the Dionysiac mitra (worn below the hairline and not above). It is Lysimachos who is responsible for fundamentally changing this humble Ptolemaic prototype into one of the most successful coin designs of the Hellenistic period, and still copied in Roman times (and also by modern Albanian and Greek (pl. 29.3) coins of the twentieth century ad).15 But again, such a portrait-type stressing solely Alexander’s divine origins is less prominent especially in the Roman period.16 Among the Koinon of Makedonia this type is seldom found.17 They always show the horn overlapping Alexander’s ear, unlike the two variants of Lysimachos’ coinage depicting this particular detail either curving around the ear or overlapping it. A special case is represented by the coins in the name of Aesillas the Quaestor. Only they lack the diadem and hence have a stronger focus on the horns of Zeus Ammon alone. Although their creators were certainly aware of the coins of Lysimachos, this type represents a new invention. It is trying to establish a portrait of Alexander suitable for Roman authorities, but also maintaining the general and familiar features of the much appreciated type of Lysimachos. 42

MAN, KING, HERO AND GOD

Diademed portraits of Alexander This type is by far the most prominent and widespread representation of Alexander after the Diadochi and throughout the Roman period.18 Alexander is beardless and wears a diadem as indication of his royal rank.19 His hair is always – with the exception of late Roman contorniates, one medallion from Tarsos and one type of Koinon bronzes – shown more or less smooth and falling down his neck and not flying horizontally in the wind.20 These exceptions on the other hand share this prominent characteristic of windblown hair, which appears to move in a breeze, as the king rushes forward. It is remarkable that this feature appears only from the third century ad onwards; there are no earlier examples in existence.21 Similar expressive coiffures with flame-like locks are, however, known from portraits of Seleukid rulers (Alexander VI and Tryphon) and Mithradates VI of Pontos.22 Although there are no such earlier images of Alexander, this romantic feature was considered to indicate Alexander-like qualities and the ability to rule,23 and it is possible that this special feature was added to Alexander’s portrait during the Severan dynasty, when Alexander the Great was in the focus of rulers such as Caracalla, Elagabalus and Severus Alexander. This view is also supported by the fact that all examples from this period are closely related in terms of their iconography.24 There are, on the other hand, no examples extant of this particular feature of Alexander’s diademed portrait apart from numismatics, especially not in sculpture. The type with Alexander’s hair falling down his neck includes a number of variants with differently elaborated facial features and rendering of his locks. Another point in favour of a closer chronology seems to be Alexander’s curved front – for the first time appearing on coins of Lysimachos – which is a regular feature on civic coinage mainly from the third century ad onwards: again bronzes of the Makedonian Koinon and the gold medallions shows this.25 Apparently this romantic feature, too, derives from contemporary third-century ad portraits, prominent only from the Severan period onwards.26 It is tempting to consider that representations of Caracalla, whose portrait-type established during his sole reign bears such a feature, may have been involved in the creation of such contemporary Alexander images.27 Several other elements of Alexander’s portrait such as the shape of his diadem (narrow or broad) and different ways of depicting his hair are illustrated on civic coins from Kilikia. While coins from Aigeai of ad 40/41 possess well-structured masses of hair above and below the diadem, others from Alexandria kat’Isson from ad 43/44 present themselves with their hair in a wreath-like arrangement below the diadem. Both also have Alexander’s rebellious front locks (anastolé) and strands of hair hanging down on the neck. In contrast in Hierapolis (RPC I no. 4064) Alexander’s hair appears as an unstructured mass, vividly arranged in numerous individual locks; the diadem is hardly visible. Much less representative of Alexander’s portraiture 43

MAN, KING, HERO AND GOD

is the case of Epiphania, where the engraver combined the physiognomy of Domitia and Alexander, as related coins prove.28 A new feature is the extremely broad diadem in Aigeai under Hadrian. Neighbouring Hierapolis presents the opposite under the Antonines. This variability becomes very obvious in the comparably huge issue of Aigeai under Macrinus: here almost every portrait used is different, and the same is true of Alexandria at the Issos in ad 231/232 and finally Aigeai again in ad 253/254. This varying appearance and shape of these features (diadem, hair, movement of head) were obviously not regulated in any way, but left to the decision of the individual engraver. As even within the same region and city such a variety is extant, Alexander’s (numismatic) portrait was obviously recreated whenever there was need to have it represented on coins without relying on a certain strictly regulated prototype or model; the king’s alleged qualities, youth, virtue and dynamism, were characterised through these iconographic elements and their careful selection. A similar procedure, very much indebted to local styles, should also be attributed to Alexander’s portraits in the Roman Dekapolis. In contrast, the huge output of the Makedonian League shares a uniform appearance of Alexander’s physiognomy, and the depiction of his diadem and the repeatedly tilted head. Here, as described above, two variants with flying or smooth hair are in use. Several cases of die-combinations give evidence of a long period of production by a single workshop. In addition one would think that statues and monuments erected in Beroia influenced the portraits of Alexander used on these coins and shaped their designs. Late Roman contorniates feature both ways of depicting Alexander’s hair. The image with flying hair again stresses the close relationship of Koinon bronzes, gold medallions and contorniates. Obverse dies XIV to XVIII and XX represent careful reproductions of these designs. Die XIX, on the other hand, features a much more static version with smooth, but long hair and a diadem positioned high on Alexander’s head. Two more images with the king’s bust (dies XXI and XXI a) reject the romantic undertone of all the other portraits of Alexander on contorniates by lacking the upward turn of the head and longer hair. The features on die XIX a, finally, are surprisingly bearded portraits, certainly going back to portraits of Makedonian kings after Alexander.29 The large number of portraits of Alexander showing him with his hair flying in the wind again prove the enormous popularity of such a romantic and exaggerated likeness conveniently playing to the taste of this period and its appreciation of Alexander’s legend.

Alexander wearing a helmet In general, such portraits represent a rare exception, including those in sculpture in the round.30 As with the previously discussed portrait types, 44

MAN, KING, HERO AND GOD

there is a certain (in the case of this particular type) even stronger break between the Hellenistic and Roman imperial periods. The only examples from the Hellenistic period are represented by bronze coins from Memphis which were identified as portraits of Alexander by M.J. Price. Here the king wears the so-called Phrygian-type helmet with its characteristic curved peak. It was a helmet of such a type that Alexander most probably actually used in battle.31 The same helmet, additionally decorated by two plumes, is shown on the ‘Poros medallions’, which feature the full figure of Alexander in armour. All later surviving coin images of Alexander lack the helmet; most prefer the likeness of the young and beardless king with full hair.32 The Roman imperial period on the other hand features a number of portraits of Alexander, now equipped with a helmet of the Attic type. These are both bronze coins in the name of the Makedonian League (throughout the period of issuing such Alexander images in ad 218–246) and some gold medallions from Aboukir. They show a helmet lacking the usual cheek pieces, with a pronounced horizontal reinforcing peak and its calotte decorated with various scenes or animals and sometimes impressively elaborated plumes.33 A rare variant of the Koinon bronze coins shows on the reverse Alexander on horseback, this time again with an Attic helmet.34 Some of the coins issued by the Koinon replace the more common griffin or serpent which decorate the helmet (obviously in the tradition of such ornaments on the helmet of Athena of gold staters issued in Alexander’s lifetime),35 with simplified scenic representations of horsemen and/or battle scenes,36 familiar from the Aboukir medallions Dressel M and N. All examples show, besides again uniform physiognomy, Alexander’s long hair although in reality it should be covered by the helmet: below the neck cover and on his temples locks of the king’s hair are clearly visible. His anastolé, though, and with it his front locks, are no longer visible. It is hence very obvious that although the designer of these portraits wanted to stress Alexander’s military virtue through his protective device, additional qualities, formulated by his long and leonine hair, remained powerful and important. There is no tradition of an Alexander portrait with a helmet on late Roman contorniates.37

Others Only one other portrait-type of Alexander differs from those described so far. The obverse of a bronze coin from Kapitolias in the Roman province of Arabia around ad 190 and again re-used in ad 204/205 shows the king’s bust without any diadem, but wearing a heavily ornamented cloak. This local transformation of Alexander’s likeness testifies to notions of 45

MAN, KING, HERO AND GOD

the traditional representation of a ruler in an oriental sphere, very much influenced by Parthian royal portraiture.

Bust-types The emergence of a bust, i.e. showing the upper body of Alexander instead of his head only, is a rather late phenomenon. There are no examples known from the Hellenistic period. It is the region of Kilikia which again takes a leading role in the genesis of Alexander’s numismatic portrait. Aigeai and Alexandria at the Issos feature a draped and diademed bust in the middle of the first century ad, and an armoured bust appears in Hierapolis during the Antonine period. Only Kapitolias in Roman Arabia adds a new feature around ad 190 with the ornamented cloak worn by Alexander (see above). A full variety of representations of busts is offered by the bronze coinage of the Makedonian Koinon. Besides a variant of the Herakles-type (see above, also copied on contorniates and on one medallion from Tarsos), they show three different types of Alexander’s armoured bust (AMNG III 1 type F, K and H).38 New specimens added fresh information on the chronological sequence which develops as follows. The earliest type is represented by the armoured bust of Alexander to the left seen from the back equipped with diadem, shield, spear and windblown hair (type F of AMNG nos. 405–407), in use during the reign of Severus Alexander. It is twinned with a different type (K of AMNG nos. 837–840) which features the king’s bust to the right seen from the front, again armoured and diademed, holding a shield of which only smaller parts are visible next to his body; Alexander’s long hair now simply falls down his neck.39 Under Gordianus III these types are matched by a third one (type H of AMNG nos. 703–709, 808–813, 816–817) now showing a more simplified version of the king’s bust to the right: he again has long motionless hair and is seen from the front. The shield is lacking now, as is the standard decoration of the breastplate, but the upward movement of Alexander’s armour at his left shoulder indicates a characteristic pose: the arm is thought to be raised in a dramatic pose.40 The gold medallions from Aboukir feature even more elaborated variants of bust-types, all of them in contrast combined with a helmeted portrait of Alexander. Struck from the same die are Dressel B, H and I with a draped and armoured bust seen from the front and turned to the left. There is no direct parallel for busts of this variant within the coinage of the Makedonian Koinon. Absolutely unique – not only within numismatics but in the whole of our archaeological material – remains the spectacular frontal bust-type of Alexander represented by Dressel C, K and L: Alexander, diademed and armoured, but lacking the helmet, holding spear and shield.41 46

MAN, KING, HERO AND GOD

Dressel M, with an armoured bust to the right and the shield behind the left shoulder, on the other hand, shows obvious parallels to type K of the Koinon bronzes; only the helmet represents an additional feature. The same is true of Dressel N, which differs only in the details of its decorations. In both cases the shape of the upper body and of the area around the arm and the leather strips at the shoulder are familiar from the Makedonian League’s coins.42

47

3 MAKING GOOD USE OF A LEGEND

The Alexander of kings Ptolemy is the first of Alexander’s successors and the first minting authority ever to issue whole series of coins with Alexander’s portrait.1 Within a few years after Alexander’s death Ptolemy discontinues the conventional coins issued in his lifetime (Herakles/Zeus-type) and introduces the portrait of Alexander wearing an elephant’s scalp on his gold, silver, and bronze coinage. Additional bronze coins also feature two variants of another type with the horn of Zeus Ammon and a fillet only. A scenic representation of Alexander driving in a quadriga of elephants appears on a gold coin issued for a short while around 300 bc. Alexander clearly represents the foundation of Ptolemy’s claim of legitimacy to rule over Egypt. His image is carefully constructed and developed, and pragmatically employed: the divine character of the now dead king becomes the spearhead of Ptolemy’s policy of presenting himself as a legitimate successor of, or rather substitute for, Alexander himself. To some degree, he also maintains the (rather theoretical) idea of a united empire held in trust, which is to be returned into the hands of the kings.2 Yet it still acts as a strong reminder of exactly who was in possession of the king’s precious remains. The purpose here is not really to portray Alexander as an individual, but rather to exploit his legend and ideological potential as an instrument of Ptolemy’s own interests prior to his assumption of the diadem in 305 bc. Alexander is always presented not as a human, but as a divine figure; the world of the living, whose guardian the dead king became, is mirrored through this contrast and thus left for others to rule. Ptolemy takes the lead in using Alexander’s image on coins at the beginning of his rule. And just as he had presented himself as an ingenious manipulator then, the king in Egypt is now also the first to replace Alexander (this again being an example for his rivals with the exception of Lysimachos prior to 297 bc): around 300 bc (with the exception of one series of bronze coins) Ptolemy’s portrait appears exclusively on the obverses of his gold and silver coinage. 48

MAKING GOOD USE OF A LEGEND

Alexander had meanwhile done his part in securing the early years of Ptolemy’s reign; his importance now lies solely in the cult developed around his monumental grave in the royal cemetery at Alexandria. Coins as a medium of contemporary material culture are now used to portray members of the Ptolemaic royal family. In contrast, Seleukos had no need to portray Alexander on his coins before the assumption of the royal title by him and his rivals around 305 bc. Therefore in his realm Alexander’s image is never the icon of a purportedly still united kingdom, aimed at conserving Alexander’s whole empire, as it might have been claimed in Egypt and elsewhere at least before 317 bc.3 Alexander is not of obvious and lasting importance in the context of Seleukos’ coinage, as the king’s portrait with the elephant’s scalp only features on a few short-lived series of coins issued around 300 bc in eastern mints.4 A strong local and indigenous momentum is implied by the Persian weight standard of these gold darics and double darics.5 Although Alexander certainly represented one source of legitimacy and is claimed as a divine guardian by Seleukos, too,6 the need to portray Alexander seems to have arisen quite late and in relation to the events of 305 to 301 bc. This period witnessed not only the year of the kings and the victory of coalition forces over Antigonos the One-eyed, but also Seleukos’ campaign on the borders of India around 307–c. 302 bc. The latter event proved itself a strong reminder of Alexander’s own military deeds and conveniently put the two kings in parallel.7 The victory at Ipsos in 301 bc secured the rule of Seleukos and certainly plays some, but obviously not a major, part in the ideological background of producing such coins.8 Agathokles of Syracuse presents us with a very brief, but extraordinary, transfer of the Ptolemaic elephant-type to Sicily. The nature of these scarce coins as a very pointed victory issue remains obvious. The undefeated king of Asia becomes an icon of victory for a later generation. Nevertheless Alexander’s portrait may give evidence of a rather unofficial personal agenda of Agathokles: being a second Alexander and thus winning decisive victories just as his idol did, Agathokles adds new features to his own reputation. As later sources compare the two kings on equal terms, the rare victory issue of Agathokles with the portrait of Alexander may indeed present an unusual case of expressing a very personal infatuation with Alexander.9 Only very late in his career does Lysimachos portray his relationship to the Great king in his coinage. As in the case of Ptolemy, the new Alexander coins of Lysimachos reach a similar level of both homogeneity and quality within their vast sequence of issues. The ruler of Thrace is actually the only one of the successors to produce such a uniform coinage bearing Alexander’s image in the latter half of his reign.10 Obviously influenced by the changing political situation after the death of his ally 49

MAKING GOOD USE OF A LEGEND

Kassandros, Lysimachos undertakes a full reorganisation of his monetary policy. This is also influenced by his military successes in Asia Minor, Makedonia and Thessaly in the early 280s bc following the battle at Ipsos in 301 bc. From c. 297 bc onwards the uniform images of Alexander on his gold and silver coins and of Nike crowning the name of Lysimachos literally put the king on a par with Alexander. Athena, Alexander’s former guardian, has now changed sides in favour of Lysimachos. The obverse portrait of Alexander symbolises the universal promise and claim of ruling the whole world, commemorating the oracle at Siwah. Referring to Alexander as a way of legitimising his own rule is something that Lysimachos is known to have done in contexts other than coinage.11 He calls himself a ‘friend and sociate of Alexander’12 when addressing the Makedonians in 285 bc. A city (at its re-foundation/naming) such as Alexandria in the Troad was given his name, and like the Great king, Lysimachos supported the famous Ilion.13 However, the monetary function of his impressive coinage should not be forgotten. The use of money to finance his wars and maintain his rule must be considered a key function. Not without reason was Lysimachos nicknamed the treasurer.14 Ptolemy, a son of Lysimachos, and ruler of Telmessos, takes his affiliation with Alexander only through his father’s example.15 The quotation of Lysimachos’ coinage remains the sole reason for the appearance of such a portrait of Alexander on these few bronze coins. For Agathokles of Baktria, ‘Alexander, son of Philip’, whom he advertises on his pedigree coins around 190–170 bc, no longer represents any personal relationship. Together with royal ancestors of Agathokles – Antiochos Nikator, Diodotos Soter and Theos, Euthymedos Theos, Demetrios Aniketos and Pantaleon Soter – Alexander has become a prominent and highly desirable figure from the past, lending legitimacy to a present ruler. While these are each characterised by one epithet,16 Alexander alone is set at the head of this fictitious sequence of rulers and characterised as a true offspring of Makedonia and the Argead house. Agathokles himself appears as a part of the coin’s peculiar legend ‘under the government of Agathokles the Just’. In view of these uniform legend and cultic epithets of his royal ancestors there is much evidence in favour of the existence of an official ruler cult inaugurated by Agathokles to boost his own authority.17

Alexander the Makedonian Some of the coins presented in this study emphasise Alexander’s home country. This particular perception goes further than simply accentuating either a dynastic legitimacy or specific Greek or Makedonian origins of the authority responsible for striking such coins. In particular, the latter aspect is always included in the case of civic coinages honouring the founder Alexander. 50

MAKING GOOD USE OF A LEGEND

For Agathokles of Baktria as for Ptolemy, and to a lesser extent Lysimachos and Seleukos, legitimising his own claim to rule by commemorating a dynastic descent remains the main focus. Most noticeable is the filiation ‘of Philip’ used by Agathokles to identify Alexander.18 In matters of a regional origin, the coins issued in the name of Aesillas in the early first century bc are much closer. Though put into circulation by Roman authorities, their production in Makedonia and especially their label ‘of the Makedonians’ on the obverses, in combination with Alexander’s portrait, strongly characterises the late king as a Makedonian and adds a certain nationalistic tone. This is even more remarkable as every sign and attribute of Alexander’s royal rank has been carefully omitted. The bronze coinage of the League of the Makedonians must be placed in a similar Makedonian tradition. In addition, these coins now include Alexander’s royal rank and enthusiastically work at presenting him as a national hero and legendary king, showing his life, exemplary deeds, and military virtues as well as his famous procreation by Zeus Ammon in the figure of a serpent. The combination of various obverse portraits of Alexander with a large number of related scenic representations highlighting a commemoration of a famous past and reshaping Makedonian identity is exceptional.19 Within the civic coinages of the Hellenistic, and much more the Roman periods, the ones from Gerasa and Kapitolias of the second and third centuries ad take the first place.20 Here Alexander is actually called ‘the Makedonian’ in combination with his title as the cities’ founder.21 This in both cases targets the (alleged) admirable age and noble descent of these communities – interestingly, neighbours of each other and active as contemporaries. Under Elagabalus, Gerasa again relates to Alexander explicitly as a Makedonian (but does not call him a founder, though he was certainly taken as such). As the only city to strike coins with Alexander’s portrait, Aigeai in Kilikia advertises itself self-confidently as a ‘Makedonian’ community: a legend naming the city ‘Makedoniké’ is used frequently together with Alexander’s image and the city’s full names and titles in ad 217/218. In this case the transformation of what was first only a descriptive adjective into an honorary formula becomes very apparent. Only as a secondary aspect one must point out a few cases of Greek cities of the Roman period from which there is no testimony of any association with Alexander and no claim for him as a founder. The title Makedonian was strong and attractive enough to have it put on their coins, though a portrait of Alexander never appears.22 Within the group of late Roman contorniates nine of fifteen obverse dies bearing a legend feature the addition ‘MACEDON’, or less often ‘MAKE∆ΩN’, always combined with the epithet ‘the Great’. Among the reverse dies three out of four call Alexander ‘great’ and ‘Makedonian’ (exclusively in Latin).23 Remarkably, here is the much favoured combination 51

MAKING GOOD USE OF A LEGEND

of the two epithets, marking Alexander’s geographical origins and place in history. In contrast to earlier examples, the Roman desire for visualising a glorious figure of the (pagan) past does not include any local or nationalistic particularities.

The founder of cities Aside from the koinon coinage and a few implying imperial affiliation to Alexander, all civic money bearing a representation of Alexander aims at presenting him as the alleged founder of the particular community.24 Because of the large numbers of examples, the various ways of using Alexander’s image will be examined and arranged following chronological, typological and regional aspects pointing out possible lines of development. The accompanying legend only rarely provides additional support for the claim of having Alexander as a city’s founder by naming him accordingly as a ktistes (founder). This classical term25 is used by Apollonia Mordiaion under Caracalla and by Gerasa under Septimius Severus and Caracalla.26 In contrast, Kapitolias prefers the specific term genarches (forefather). Other cities decide to present a distinctive scene of their own founding legend, thus making their point by exchanging a less characteristic portrait head or bust for a more telling picture to stress local pride without giving additional information through the coin’s inscription. The earliest securely identified allusion to Alexander is represented by the head of Herakles on coins of Alexandria kat’Isson in Kilikia of the second and first centuries bc. Keeping in mind the evidence from ancient literature, this Herakles must be taken as a reference to the king and to Makedonia in general.27 From the mid-first century ad we again have evidence from Alexandria and Aigeai in Kilikia and also from Hierapolis in the same region featuring the diademed head of Alexander and one of Herakles (from Alexandria kat’Isson). Further examples are provided by Epiphania for ad 83/84 and again by Aigeai in Kilikia for ad 113/114 and 117/118.28 Smyrna in Ionia offers the first such coin images outside Kilikia between ad 147 and 161 (picturing their local founder’s legend, again in the midthird century ad), while Hierapolis for the second and last time makes use of Alexander’s portrait in this period. Alexandria in the Troad soon follows the example of Smyrna from the 160s ad onwards by also featuring a local transformation of Alexander (continued well into the mid-third century ad). For a short period in the 180s ad Nikaia in Bithynia shows portraits and the spear-holding figure of Alexander. This later Antonine period also saw the introduction of Alexander’s legend in Roman Arabia (the former Dekapolis), where Gerasa, Kapitolias and presumably the latter city together with Abila show very characteristic interpretations of images of Alexander (continuing into the time of the Severan dynasty). With Caracalla, Apollonia Mordiaion joins this group of communities 52

MAKING GOOD USE OF A LEGEND

and proudly advertises its founder through the legend, but uses only the Herakles-type image. Alexandria kat’Isson shows the figure of a founder in ad 215/216. Soon afterwards under Macrinus there is an increased interest in Alexander again in Kilikia, but solely in Aigeai. Under emperors such as Elagabalus and Alexander Severus, we have only scarce evidence from Caesarea ad Libanum and Nikaia, and Alexandria kat’Isson respectively. The latest examples are again from Alexandria in the Troad in ad 251–260 and Aigeai in ad 253/254. In the light of these late examples whose craftsmanship is rather poor, the impressive scenic representation of Alexander from Sagalassos in Pisidia of ad 268–270 deserves attention. This brief outline of surviving examples of numismatic references to Alexander also makes it possible to comment on the chronological and regional pattern encountered. Up to the mid-second century ad only a maximum of two communities at a time distribute such images, but there is increased concern from the Antonine period onwards, continuing into the third century ad.29 Three cities, which before were not involved in distributing images of Alexander, join in between the last years of M. Aurelius and the reign of Commodus: Nikaia, Alexandria in the Troad, and Kapitolias. Under Septimius Severus there are four (Alexandria in the Troad, ‘Abila and Kapitolias’, Kapitolias, Gerasa), two of them without any prior record. Only one newcomer, Apollonia Mordiaion, has to be named under Caracalla and his father Septimius Severus respectively, again together with Alexandria in the Troad and Alexandria kat’Isson during Caracalla’s sole reign.30 Under Elagabalus three cities (Alexandria in the Troad, Caesarea ad Libanum, and Gerasa) are on record.31 The reign of Severus Alexander shows the same number of communities engaged (Nikaia, Alexandria in the Troad, Alexandria kat’Isson). After the Severan period numbers drop down to only one example per reign. A similar, but much more precise, development appears when taking into account not only the cities themselves, but the different coin-types distributed by these communities:32 a first peak is certainly represented by the time of Commodus. This is caused by the large number of portrait-heads and figures of Alexander in Nikaia in Bithynia during the early 180s ad.33 On a slightly lower level are the years ad 193–21134 and ad 211–217 respectively.35 Lower again, but still impressive, is the record for the reign of Elagabalus and Severus Alexander.36 One has to stress the case of Aigeai, which under Macrinus still remains active and shows an increasing interest in this topic. It is the only mint active during this emperor’s short reign.37 The subsequent decades of the third century show very clearly decreasing numbers to a maximum of one type per city in question. However, between ad 250 and 260 there is a slow rise, for which Alexandria in the Troad and Aigeai are responsible, with Aigeai even issuing two different coin-types in ad 253/254. Although Caracalla, whose infatuation with Alexander was already 53

MAKING GOOD USE OF A LEGEND

(in)famous during his lifetime, is represented by a large number of examples (including some prior to his sole reign), the use of references to Alexander is already common under the Antonines (even when excluding the case of Nikaia). References to Alexander in this earlier period obviously cannot relate to Caracalla’s later imitation of him, but reflect a general awareness and need for civic representation and the approach of particular communities towards this goal. The case of Caracalla is still best explained as one of cities attempting to show loyalty and support for a prince and emperor by flattering his veneration of Alexander. This motive is well suited to communities which inaugurate such coin-images for the first time during the period of ad 193–217 and have no earlier tradition of Alexander images. The later Severan emperors Elagabalus and Severus Alexander are represented by a sufficient number of examples of numismatic evidence mirroring the imitation of Alexander following the example of Caracalla and presenting them indirectly as proper successors of their alleged ancestor. The subsequent years of the third century ad provide evidence on a much lower level, though certainly motivated again by civic pride rather than imperial models. The geographical distribution of civic coinages clearly shows the importance of the region of Kilikia. It is here that the first coins are issued, and it is not the Hellenic period but rather the first and early second centuries ad which present impressive examples. Only from after Caracalla onwards to Severus Alexander and again in the mid-third century ad is this tradition revived, initially only in Aigeai and Alexandria kat’Isson. Under the Antonines, the Alexander tradition extends into the heartland of the Graeco-Roman world. Examples are now found in Ionia, the Troad and Bithynia. The end of this period is represented by the case of Kapitolias in the Roman province of Arabia (the former Dekapolis). Under the Severans (ad 193–235) the Troad, Bithynia, Kilikia and Arabia continue and to some extent intensify their activity, with Apollonia Mordiaion in Pisidia and possibly Caesarea joining in. After ad 235 numbers decrease rapidly, and now only Smyrna in Ionia renews an earlier reverse type of the second century ad and Alexandria in the Troad continues its quite stereotypical designs. Bithynia and the Near East are no longer represented, while Aigeai in Kilikia issues one last series. Only Sagalassos in Pisidia stands out with its single and final reverse scene. Obviously the first initiative to relate to Alexander as a founder originates from the region of Kilikia. The Antonine period, which witnesses the flourishing of the second sophistic and raised civic awareness,38 offers examples from (mainly western) Asia Minor, too. Moreover, the later second and early third centuries ad add the Roman Near East to the scene. After ad 235 the phenomenon of commemorating Alexander is restricted to a much smaller area, now again Kilikia and to some extent Smyrna in Ionia. In every respect, the latest Pisidian example represents a remarkable exception. Taking into account the various ways of actually depicting Alexander, we 54

MAKING GOOD USE OF A LEGEND

are confronted with quite characteristic approaches on the part of each city concerned. The early examples from Kilikia also show the head or bust of Alexander wearing the diadem (with the one exception of the head of Herakles/Alexander with lion’s scalp). As late as under Trajan the standing figure of the founder appears in Aigeai, which again is used in ad 253/254 and a few years earlier in Alexandria kat’Isson in ad 215/216. Aigeai always combines these two coin-reverses with additional issues featuring a diademed portrait-bust of Alexander. The cities in Roman Arabia also favour busttypes, with Kapitolias proudly featuring local oriental traditions regarding the representation of a ruler’s cloak (and interestingly lacking the royal diadem). The alliance coin of ‘Kapitolias and Abila’ combines two founders, Alexander and Seleukos, shaking hands. This either is an example of the common sterotypic representation of such figures on such occasions or goes back to some kind of prototype in sculpture (though certainly not in exactly this ‘heraldic’ pose). Similarly shaped by iconographical topoi is the case of the temple with Alexander (?) in Caesarea ad Libanum. The cities of Roman Asia Minor greatly favour individual and direct hints towards their own history. Only Nikaia in Bithynia makes use of a conventional portrait-head, while Apollonia Mordiaion copies the coinage issued in Alexander’s lifetime (with the head of Herakles). Here, communities show a keen interest in alluding to their individual founding legend, carefully incorporating Alexander into this artificially constructed and promoted interpretation of their own past. Smyrna features the dream of Alexander and the two Nemeseis, and Alexandria in the Troad shows two episodes of Alexander and the oracle which inaugurated the foundation of the city. As well as the portrait-head, Nikaia uses a standing heroic figure of Alexander, most probably showing a statue erected in this city. Another local transformation is represented by Sagalassos in Pisidia. Summing up, we are confronted with elaborated scenic representations only in Asia Minor, with a few additional examples rooted in more heraldic and stereotypical models in Aigeai, Alexandria kat’Isson, Caesarea ad Libanum, and ‘Kapitolias and Abila’. With the exception of Nikaia, Aigeai and Alexandria kat’Isson, such scenes are not combined with additional heads or busts of Alexander on contemporary issues. As regards both the variety of types in use and the quantities, we experience rising numbers between the 180s ad, the beginning of the Severan period and the death of Severus Alexander in ad 235.

55

4 EXCURSUS: ALEXANDER IN DISGUISE

The use of Alexander’s portrait on coins ended with late Roman contorniates, though the appreciation of his legend continued into the Middle Ages with alterations and elaborations through tales and stories. The Hellenistic and Roman Alexander Romance subsequently formed the base for spectacular and fantastic stories of an exemplary explorer, conqueror and king, a Christian knight or Muslim warrior.1 It was not until the Renaissance and its renewed interest in classical antiquity that Alexander himself reappeared on numismatic objects. Reading the famous authors from classical antiquity again, and subsequently collecting authentic coins created and reflected the desire for possessing true representations of the Great king. It is no wonder that Renaissance scholars attempted to identify such portraits of Alexander, and in doing so took the first exploratory steps into what would be an academic field in its own right in the future: numismatics, the study of (ancient) coinage.2 These steps from antiquarian interest and collecting to research were characterised and hindered by limited access to the material in question, the need to create a corpus of coins first and the slow development of a scientific methodology. Following the hypothesis that a ruler’s portraits should appear on the obverse of his coins, early scholars fell victim to an error with quite substantial consequences. In fact, it shaped the image the Renaissance and Baroque periods had of Alexander and even continued to influence our idea of the kings’ likeness well into the twentieth century: Alexander’s own gold staters bearing his name and the likeness of Athena with a Corinthian helmet were consequently taken as a portrait of the king.3 Andrea Fulvio (c. 1470–1527), to whom we owe one of the first corpora on ancient coins, accepted this interpretation.4 And the popularity of his work, subsequent copies and new editions made this ‘Alexander’-Athena popular in various media such as paintings, sculpture, precious stones and medal art.5 Consequently other representations of Athena apart from those on Alexander’s coinage such as, for example, the Athena of Corinth were now free to be taken as images of Alexander or other rulers.6 Similar mistakes were not uncommon and also worked the other way around: hence the portrait of 56

EXCURSUS: ALEXANDER IN DISGUISE

Alexander with ram’s horn on coins of Lysimachos changed into a likeness of the latter since his name appears in the legend.7 Constanzo Landi, for instance, reports his visit to the goldsmith and medal-maker Giovanni Cavino of Padua, where he was shown such a coin of Lysimachos.8 As early as 1606 one author knew better.9 The close relationship of contemporary medal art and manuscript illustrations which were both reliant upon this false conception of Alexander is well represented by two bronze medallions of the famous engraver Alessandro Cesati:10 Alexander’s fictitious encounter with the Jewish High Priest occupied the reverse of a medal in honour of Pope Paul III (whose secular name was Alexander) in 1545/46 (pl. 29.1). Alexander kneels in front of the priest just as ‘every king should do’, illustrating the papal claim to supremacy concealed in a pseudo-historical representation. The king wears his armour and a prominent helmet of the Corinthian type again. The idea of Alexander visiting Jerusalem was taken from the ‘Historienbibel’ and the Vulgate of the late fifteenth century.11 Another of Cesati’s medallions depicts Alexander’s triumphal arrival in Babylon (pl. 29.2). Again the source of inspiration was taken from an earlier book illustration.12 The obverse also follows the conventional scheme, showing the king’s head wearing a helmet of the Corinthian type. It seems that for a long period connoisseurs and antiquarians were quite content with the fundamentally flawed picture of Alexander they had created. Yet in making Alexander the vessel of their own imagination they unknowingly followed a path similar to the one already taken by authorities in antiquity.

57

CONCLUSION: PERSPECTIVES AND LIMITATIONS

The use of Alexander’s likeness on coins remained a familiar practice throughout antiquity. It draws our attention to the political agenda, programme and mentality of those authorities – royal, civic (and occasionally private) – responsible for their production.1 Moreover, these coins provide a corpus of representations of Alexander over a period of c. 700 years. Each such portrait or representation of a whole scene carries additional information on the initiator, place, and time of its production. By their nature, they always convey positive ideas of Alexander.2 As a first-hand source for the number and variety of portraits of Alexander once in existence, however, these coins offer an opportunity for analysing the development of Alexander’s portrait-types in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. They provide iconographical data, which may also supplement our knowledge of statues of the king from antiquity that are now lost. Gems, paintings and evidence from written ancient sources should also be kept in mind. This feature may allow us to calibrate the numismatic evidence with that provided by sculpture; potential parallel developments of portraits of Alexander and statue-types within these two groups of material culture may become obvious. On the other hand, do portrait-heads or busts of Alexander on coins always derive from a certain prototype in sculpture or not? Of special interest are depictions of Alexander on coins, which may actually reflect and depict genuine statues of him.3 As regards early depictions of Alexander on bronzes from Memphis and Naukratis we have to acknowledge a serious lack of evidence. There is actually no proof of the existence of sculptured prototypes except the hypothesis that in the Greek city of Naukratis we might expect the use of such models familiar from western Asia Minor.4 The spectacular warrior figure of Alexander carrying a thunderbolt on the so-called Poros medallions has a naked heroic counterpart in the figure on the Neisos gem.5 It recalls what we later hear of the Alexander Keraunophoros (Greek: carrying a thunderbolt), a famous painting by Apelles in Ephesos.6 The victorious rider as encountered fighting Poros on his elephant, however, is derived from a model of rulers on horseback that is much too common to represent any 58

CONCLUSION

particular monument.7 Although in these examples their origin in contemporary lifetime monuments becomes evident, there is no apparent case of direct reception of a certain prototype. Alexander, however, is represented on coins during his lifetime (if the Egyptian bronzes really portray him and if the elephant medallions were issued before the death of the king) according to models we could also expect on paintings, statues or reliefs, and in the minor arts. The prominent appearance of Alexander’s portraits on the obverses of Ptolemy’s tetradrachms (as well as on Agathokles’ and Seleukos’ gold staters8) and on Lysimachos’ coinage is similarly disappointing if one expects to find a prototype in sculpture. Though to this day these two portrait-types have been considered the most prominent and artistic rendering of Alexander, there is no piece of sculpture that could be linked with them. There is no evidence apart from these coins themselves.9 The progressive development of the elephant’s scalp-type between 320 and 315 bc in particular speaks against a specific prototype in sculpture.10 The same negative answer holds for Ptolemaic bronze coins of this type and the one depicting Alexander wearing a mitra only.11 It seems that Ptolemy’s coins depict Alexander deified with a number of attributes taken from the gods, in marked contrast to the monuments that King Ptolemy erected in his capital, which lack such godly features.12 Therefore these numismatic portraits of Alexander can most likely be considered careful and original creations of talented engravers at the royal court; they were specifically designed to be used on coins and distributed for this purpose only.13 Lysimachos’ Alexander with diadem and ram’s horn is even more prominent and well-known but there is no attestation of such a portrait in sculpture.14 Some possibilities have been suggested but they all lack the attribute of Zeus Ammon, and often the diadem too.15 A. Stewart drew attention to a head from Thasos without diadem and horns and related it to the Alexander on the coins of Lysimachos. Unfortunately this head has not been sufficiently published (there are no photographs of the sides and back of this head, which might be of additional importance because of its archaeological context within an environment suggesting a cult in honour of Alexander).16 Even if this head really represents Alexander, it is – according to Stewart – a Roman copy of a Greek original of c.320–300 bc, not a contemporary piece of sculpture.17 And if the original indeed lacked the royal diadem and the horns of Zeus Ammon, it could hardly be a candidate for the fully developed deified Alexander we encounter on the coins of Lysimachos. Adding these attributes for the design of a portrait to be used on a coin obverse would have resulted in remarkable changes to this portrait’s appearance, too, especially in the structure and depiction of the hair. Fascinating as this hypothesis may be, in Lysimachos’ case also, the artist who created this portrait of Alexander most probably was not working in stone sculpture.18 There is also another argument against a prototype and Hellenistic original in sculpture: in contrast to 59

CONCLUSION

the type with the elephant’s scalp, which would be difficult to produce in stone or marble,19 a portrait of Alexander with the horns of Zeus Ammon would have been much easier and much better suited to this material. The lack of evidence in sculpture leads to only one reasonable explanation. There never was such a portrait of Alexander in stone and never any direct relationship between coins and sculpture. The designs used to represent the living as well as the dead king were most probably exclusively modelled on established heroic or military statue-types and role-models.20 Only the representation of Alexander in a quadriga of elephants on staters of Ptolemy possibly mirrors an earlier model in sculpture. The report of the second Ptolemy’s procession in Alexandria has already been noted for its description of a golden statue of Alexander in such a chariot. There is reason to think, though no certainty, that the same appreciation of Alexander as witnessed in this festival of c. 276/275 bc may derive from an earlier statue already in existence under Ptolemy I.21 In Baktria, the Herakles-type portrait of Alexander is taken from his lifetime coinage and transferred into contemporary styles. There is no evidence that it is based on any sculptured model. The ideological background of the whole series of these ‘pedigree coins’ supports the hypothesis of a cult of Alexander and other ancestors by Agathokles. There may very well have been a temple or shrine with portraits of these earlier kings.22 However, the Alexander on Agathokles’ coins is clearly rooted in an exclusively numismatic tradition. There is no evidence, either, for a sculpture serving as the model for the designs of the coins in the name of Aesillas the Quaestor. Although Alexander’s windblown hair has been used to support the hypothesis of such a prototype,23 the setting of his portrait in contemporary late Hellenistic art speaks against it. We encountered similar styles and structures in the portraits of Seleukid rulers in the second century bc and of Mithradates VI of Pontos.24 And in contrast to the numismatic portrait of Alexander on the bronze coins of the Koinon and on contorniates, the coins in the name of Aesillas present Alexander only in part with truly windblown hair: only the tips of his hair are actually flying in the wind, while the strands on his neck and below his ears are rendered in natural waves and remain motionless. Also the ram’s horn would have no model in sculpture. Images of Alexander on coins from the imperial period offer a much greater variety of types in use; in consequence there is room for a wider diversity of sources of inspiration for these Alexander-related coin designs. The case of Kilikia with four communities producing civic money bearing the portrait of Alexander offers a convincing argument for one way in which these images were selected and chosen. Over a period of c. 200 years two of these cities, Alexandria kat’Isson and Aigeai issued such coins from time to time. Even within the same community, each such portrait of Alexander is different from every other. In Epiphania it became obvious 60

CONCLUSION

that this portrait of Alexander actually was amalgamated with the one of an empress. This would have been unlikely to happen if die-engravers had copied statues (or their heads) erected in these cities. Clearly this is not the case, and instead each die-engraver remodelled his interpretation of the young and dynamic king Alexander whenever such a series of coins was going to be issued. And similarly to Agathokles’ coins in Baktria, the later Alexanders in the guise of Herakles wearing a lion’s scalp, and Roman examples (Apollonia Mordiaion, the Makedonian Koinon, one medallion from Tarsos) are dependent on the numismatic model of Alexander’s lifetime coinage. The standing figure of the founder Alexander in ad 113/114 and 253/254 in Aigeai and on the coins of Alexandreia kat’Isson in ad 215/216 lacks any relation to a specific representation of Alexander. Instead, its scheme is familiar from other stereotypical motifs on coins of other cities. Although this type is not exclusively used for Alexander, it has generally been accepted that the statue of a founder was part of the monuments intended to praise the city’s history. Such statues were erected especially at city gates or in theatres.25 It is therefore possible that such coins reflect a founder-type figure of Alexander, but there is no certainty as the iconographic scheme could also represent a modified image more suited to coins. The same heraldic use of an iconographical design is found on the coins of Abila and Kapitolias with the two founders shaking hands and Alexander (?) crowning Tyche on those of Caesarea ad Libanum,26 though in general one would expect a statue of the founder in each city (but of a different type).27 The coins from Nikaia, however, may actually originate from a prototype in sculpture.28 They combine a uniform appearance of Alexander’s head with additional reverse types featuring a naked figure of Alexander. Although the portrait’s homogeneity could just as well be explained by the relatively short period of this issue and by a tradition within one particular workshop responsible for the cutting of the dies,29 the figure of Alexander is reminiscent of statue-types. Spear and thunderbolt would fit him very well, and the characteristic formula in the accusative case of the legend (‘the citizens of Nikaia [honour] Alexander’) even supports the hypothesis of an honorary monument for Alexander in Nikaia. Schreiber, the only one among earlier scholars to take notice of this reverse, related it to the famous so-called Alexander with a lance by Lysippos.30 Today scholarship does not agree with such a positivistic identification of this particular statue-type. On the one hand we do not know what this type looked like, and on the other the existence of such a statue is now very doubtful. The ancient sources report only very little and incidental information.31 The ancient and modern desire for a conveniently identifiable statue by a known sculptor may have merged several statues into one prominent example.32 The spear would certainly be historically accurate in the case of a statue in Nikaia, while the thunderbolt would count against any relationship with a type featuring Alexander 61

CONCLUSION

holding only a spear. However, the combination of these two attributes is known from a bronze statuette and two now lost representations of Alexander (?) on gems.33 The Nikaia coin and its alleged model in sculpture could hence mirror similar statues of Alexander from late in his lifetime, presenting the king as the invincible god.34 Alexander’s incorporation into a city’s founding legend and the use of very distinctive scenes such as those found in Smyrna, Alexandria in the Troad, and Sagalassos (the last referring to the conquest by Alexander’s army) is exclusive neither to coins nor to possible transformations in sculpture35 or even paintings, which could be shown in public places within the city. It remains very doubtful whether there was actually such a statue in existence in each city. The fact that these reverse types begin only during the second century ad suggests that the need to feature these topics arose from a renewed awareness of civic pride independent of any earlier monument in sculpture.36 The relatively late example from Sagalassos has been emphasised as a reflection of a civic monument.37 Although the figure of Zeus obviously calls to mind a statuary type like the Poseidon in the Lateran, this does not necessarily imply that the Alexander on horseback behind him or the whole group reflect real sculpture. It is necessary to bear in mind that certain prominent types were deliberately chosen as motifs for coins because they were so familiar and well known; they need not refer to a real sculpture of this kind in this city.38 On the other hand, the bronze coinage of the Makedonian Koinon provides among its motifs some convincing examples of representations of actual sculpture, most likely erected in Beroia itself, the city where this political body assembled and where its festivals took place. The figure of Alexander standing on a column between two temples clearly depicts the architectural setting of such a monument and some reverses feature the same statue of Alexander in an enlarged perspective without its base.39 The latter coins offer a closer look at the characteristic type of statue, which combines a spear held with its point downward, and a sword in its scabbard, again upside down.40 R. Ziegler41 recently associated this representation of Alexander with an alleged statue of this type. His argument is supported by the fact that Roman emperors frequently chose to be shown in a similar pose, proving the contemporary awareness of this type’s importance and prominence.42 Ziegler even presents one possible prototype, the so-called Alexander from Magnesia.43 Various representations of Alexander as obverse bust-type could relate to a monument in Beroia, most probably an equestrian statue, an adapted version of which would appear on coins.44 Another argument for the existence of at least some prototypes in sculpture is the close stylistic similarity of the Koinon coins to the third-century ad gold medallions from Aboukir and Tarsos, which clearly derive from the same model. The ‘Lysimachos’-type with ram’s horn,45 the one with windblown hair and the one with a helmet 62

CONCLUSION

of the Attic type46 are also familiar from the Makedonian Koinon. Even the perspective from which the bust is presented, here seen from the back with lion’s scalp, is often identical.47 Alexander taming Boukephalos or Olympias awaiting Zeus Ammon in the form of a serpent probably do not refer to sculpture. Their designs may have been taken from gems or paintings instead. These motifs are quite common and are not necessarily tied to a particular city or a particular person.48 An unusual portrait appears on the medallion Dressel C, K and L (all from the same die) featuring a frontal bust of Alexander. This portrait closely resembles a marble head from Pergamon and is probably related to this piece of sculpture. Unfortunately there is no further information on the historical background of the erection of this Alexander monument, which presumably dates from the second century bc.49 In conclusion, it is hardly possible to propose a general dependence of the coin types of Alexander on prototypes in sculpture. There are, however, some examples of such a derivation extant at least in the case of the Koinon of Makedonia and Nikaia in Bithynia. The source of inspiration for the images of Alexander on coins was most probably also taken from rather typified models (the king on horseback, the figure of the founder); foundation scenes may have been inspired by paintings also and blended with monuments in sculpture. Regarding the portrait of Alexander there is evidence for a geographically (meaning within a particular city) and chronologically restricted design: the king’s portrait is typologically dependent on featuring the young, beardless and diademed head, but always in different styles and fashions. Hence the specific portrait itself in most cases was worked by an individual die-engraver. Thus the examples from Kilikia and Arabia (which are all from the Roman period) are explained as contemporary re-interpretations of a general type. Only the Severan period (the Makedonian Koinon, gold medallions and Nikaia under Severus Alexander) presents a uniform portrait of Alexander with windblown hair, which might reflect a prominent contemporary portrait or a statue of Alexander serving as a common prototype. On the coins discussed in this book there survives a corpus which provides key evidence for portraits and representations of Alexander, which have not survived in related archaeological material. Deified types with Alexander wearing an elephant’s or lion’s scalp, or the ram’s horn, are known only from coins (and the minor arts). These in turn are mainly limited to the Hellenistic period, while under the Roman empire, Alexander is usually presented as a young and dynamic ruler. Representations of whole scenes are already popular during the second century ad and clearly reflect the need to express civic pride prior to the Severan dynasty; but still the period of Caracalla and his successors Elagabalus and Severus Alexander bears witness to the dual purpose of both serving the emperor and venerating Alexander. 63

CONCLUSION

Hence Alexander is instrumental to the specific authority and historical situation framing the creation of each of these images of the king from the beginning of the Hellenistic period to late antiquity. They are set within a socio-cultural framework of contemporary rulers and communities. Hellenistic kings, Greek cities, and finally the citizens of Rome developed their own characteristic view of Alexander. The numismatic evidence offers various (but with the exception of contorniates purely Greek) perspectives and interpretations of Alexander. Each of them is determined by the authorities responsible for their production according to a – in the case of civic coinages even stronger – local transformation and emphasis, while the successors (especially Ptolemy, Seleukos, and Lysimachos) stress their own legitimacy as followers of Alexander. However, in marked contrast to highly differentiated and ambiguous literary traditions especially in the Roman period, coins are aiming at a much simpler, but not less fascinating appreciation: Alexander’s military virtue, fame and place in history, finally merged into a legend.

64

NOTES

INTRODUCTION 1 I do not follow the custom of Latinising Greek personal and geographical names. Hence it is Lysimachos, not Lysimachus, Issos, not Issus, and Kilikia, not Cilicia. Exceptions are made in the case of some individuals such as Alexander himself, Ptolemy or others, and likewise places such as Athens, whose names are today more familiar in their Latinised form. This also has the benefit of distinguishing prominent individuals from many less famous bearers of the same name, e.g. Ptolemaios, the son of Lysimachos. Compare Billows (1990) p. xvii. 2 Among earlier scholarship regarding Alexander’s numismatic representations of the last century J.J. Bernoulli, Die erhaltenen Darstellungen Alexanders des Großen. F. Bruckmann (Munich 1905) pp. 27–31 only briefly comments on coins. The fullest corpus so far was presented only a few years earlier by Schreiber (1903) pp. 162–195 including many civic coins. Bieber (1964) mainly focuses on the more prominent Hellenistic types, but makes many errors in attribution and judgement. Touratsoglou (2000) represents the latest treatment in the form of a short, but incomplete catalogue. The Hellenistic coins with portraits of Alexander are discussed by Smith (1988) pp. 58–60 and Stewart (1993) pp. 48–51. Alexander’s transformation in civic traditions from a historio-numismatic perspective is examined by Leschhorn (1984); Ziegler (1999); Weiß (1996). – The corpus of Alexander’s lifetime coinage (including posthumous issues) is provided by Price (1991a) passim. Brief outlines are given by M.J. Price, In search of Alexander the Great, Nomismatika Chronika 5–6, 1978, pp. 27–34; S. Hurter, Alexander the Great – A numismatic itinerary, Nomismatika Chronika 5–6, 1978, pp. 35–39. 3 Smith (1988) pp. 60, 155 no. 1 pl. 1; Stewart (1993) pp. 42, 423 fig. 45–46. A Roman copy after a lifetime or early posthumous Greek original. 4 Smith (1988) p. 60; Stewart (1993) pp. 422–423 fig. 101–106. On horseback with a lion’s scalp on his head and with his horse wearing a tiara. 5 Compare Stewart (1993) pp. 421, 424–425; Smith (1988) pp. 155–156 pl. 2–3. 6 Ancient sources on Alexander’s appearance and especially his long hair, resembling a lion’s mane: Stewart (1993) pp. 72–78, 341–350. 7 Most instructive and also a warning regarding careless attempts to identify alleged portraits of Alexander still is H. Lauter, Alexanders wahres Gesicht in: W. Will and J. Heinrichs (eds), Zu Alexander d. Gr. Festschrift G. Wirth II. Adolf M. Hakkert (Amsterdam 1988) pp. 717–743. 8 Ktistes Prousias: W.H. Waddington, E. Babelon and Th. Reinach, Recueil général des monnaies grecques d’Asie mineure I 4. E. Leroux Éditeur (Paris 1910) p. 582

65

NOTES

9 10 11 12 13

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

no. 48 pl. 100.3. – Heros Kyzikos: F. von Fritze, Die autonome Kupferprägung von Kyzikos, Nomisma 10, 1917, pp. 15–18 pl. 3.15–29; 4 (group 4). – Hieros Synkletos: G. Forni, Hiera e Theos Synkletos. Atti della Academia dei Lincei. Memorie 5, 1953, p. 108 no. 172 pl. 3.39 (also Aphrodisias). Compare SNG Aulock nos. 2451–2453 pl. 77. – Demos at Aizanoi under Gallienus: SNG Glasgow no. 2009 pl. 141. – Helios (radiate): Prousias on the Hypios: Recueil I 4 (op. cit.) p. 608 no. 40 pl. 104.24. – Heros Teios: Recueil I 4 (op. cit.) pp. 617–618 nos. 10–18 pl. 106.13–22. Although we know from ancient sources that Alexander indeed wore the royal diadem at least from 330 bc on. Compare Smith (1988) p. 61; Stewart (1993) pp. 45, 91–92 n. 74; p. 127 n. 17. Howgego (1995) pp. 30–33; Mørkholm (1991) pp. 15–19. F. Millar, The Roman Near East 31 bc–ad 337. Harvard University Press (Cambridge, Mass./London 1993) pp. 230, 257. Mørkholm (1991) pp. 27–29, 32. The following remarks are intended as a brief sketch focusing on the representation of Alexander within the provincial coinage. A fuller treatment is to be found in RPC I–II passim; K. Butcher, Roman provincial coins: An introduction to the ‘Greek Imperials’. (London 1988) passim; CIRP passim; K.W. Harl, Civic coins and civic politics. University of California Press (Berkeley 1987) passim. For the use of precious metals see RPC I pp. 6–13; RPC II p. 20. CIRP p. 2. Compare W. Leschhorn, Historische Reminiszensen auf griechischen Münzen der Kaiserzeit, Mitteilungen der Österreichischen Numismatischen Gesellschaft 32, 1992, pp. 81–82. Compare the catalogue of RPC I and pp. 18–21; RPC II passim. T.B. Jones, A numismatic riddle: the so-called Greek imperials, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 107, 1963, pp. 313–324; V. Heuchert in: CIRP p. 31. Price (1984) pp. 80–81, 126–132. RPC I pp. 1–5; RPC II pp. 1–7; P. Weiß in: CIRP pp. 57–68. Compare B. Borg (ed.), Paideia. The world of the second sophistic. Walter de Gruyter (Berlin/New York 2004), see esp. P. Weiß ibid. pp. 179–197. Compare the introduction to this phenomenon given by Leschhorn (1984) pp. 1–6. Salzmann (2001) pp. 174–175. V. Heuchert in: CIRP pp. 52–55.

1 IMAGES OF ALEXANDER 1 These include two types of silver staters (didrachms) from Hierapolis-Bambyke of c. 333–325 bc with a legend referring to Alexander, but representing an indigenous horseman, whose iconography has its roots in local traditions: Obv.: Lion walking left. Aramaic Legend:
L KSNDR. Monogram and letter M. – Rev.: Alexander on horse (?) moving left.
LKSNDR. Symbol and letter B. Ref.: BMC Galatia, Cappadocia, and Syria p. 138 no. 1 pl. 17.7; H. Seyrig, Monnaies Hellénistiques, Revue Numismatique 1971, pp. 12, 15, 20 no. 8 pl. 2; Price (1991a) p. 401 pl. 158 N; Howgego (1995) p. 51 no. 48; Mildenberg (1999) pp. 284 no. 31 pl. 27.33. – Second type with obv.: Zeus/Baal on throne left. Symbol and legend
TR
TH (
Atar
ateh). – Rev.: Alexander on horse. Legend
LKSNDR. Ref.: H. Seyrig, Monnaies Hellénistiques, Revue Numismatique 1971, pp. 12, 15, 20 no. 9 pl. 2; Mildenberg (1999) p. 284 no. 30 pl. 27.32. – Mildenberg ibid. nos. 32–33 pl. 27.34–35 with two more coins bearing Alexander’s name and a representation of the goddess Artagatis on the front and a lion slaying a bull on the back. 2 Obv.: Alexander on horse charging elephant. Left field Ξ. – Rev.: Alexander

66

NOTES

3 4 5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12

13

holding thunderbolt and spear, crowned by Nike flying above. Left field monogram AB. ‘Dekadrachm’/‘five-shekel’ of unknown authority around 324 bc. See Holt (2003) for a full elaboration on earlier research and literature including a catalogue of known specimens. Reviews: Carmen Arnold-Biucchi, New England Classical Journal 32/34, Nov. 2005, pp. 356–360; Françoise de Callataÿ, l’Antiquité classique 74, pp. 480–483; O. Hoover, American Numismatic Society Magazine 3/2, 2004, pp. 58–61; Silvia Mani Hurter, Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau, 2006 [forthcoming]; K. Dahmen, Jahrbuch für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte 53/53 (2003/2004) pp. 157–164 (with table comparing identifications). Compare also Price (1991a) pp. 451–452; Bieber (1964) pp. 36–37 fig. 22; W. Messerschmidt in: R. Dittmann, Chr. Eder and B. Jacobs (eds), Altertumswissenschaften im Dialog. Festschrift für W. Nagel. Ugarit Verlag (Münster 2003) pp. 369–395; P. Debord, Les monnayages ‘perses’ à l’effigie d’Alexandre in: O. Casabonne (ed.), Mécanismes et innovations monétaires dans l’Anatolie achéménide. De Boccard (Paris 2000) pp. 255–264 pl. 39.8–9; G. Le Rider, Alexandre le Grand. Presses universitaires de France (Paris 2003) pp. 328–333. For this hoard and its chronological setting see Price (1982) p. 79; Holt (2003) pp. 92–97; Coin Hoards I. The Royal Numismatic Society (London 1975) pp. 14–16 no. 38. Plut. Alexander. 16.7; 32.8–11. Compare Arr. 1.15.8; Diod. 17.20.6. Stewart (1993) pp. 191–198. This particular depiction forms the prototype for a key scene in the latest Alexander movie (the king engaging Poros’ elephant), another proof of the strong attraction this dramatic representation still offers directors and their audience today. Stewart (1993) pp. 199–201 pl. 8 fig. 66–67. Stewart (1993) pp. 191–198 and T 59–62 (with references). – Holding thunderbolt and aegis as topos in literature in the case of Kallisthenes. Polyb. 12.12 b 3 (FGH 124 F 20), quoting Timaios: See Stewart (1993) p. 193 n. 7. Compare also the coins of Nikaia below. Stewart (1993) p. 203 fig. 36 with references to paintings in Makedonian tombs. Compare Holt (2003) p. 39 n. 37. We will continue to use the established term medallions without intending to indicate a specific function. See Holt (2003) pp. 167–169 with catalogue and illustrations. The exact date of the medallions mainly depends on how the Iraq hoard itself is dated. Price (1991a) p. 51; Price (1982) p. 79; Price (1991a) p. 67, Stewart (1993) pp. 202–203 n. 39; Holt (2003) pp. 92–97; 146–147; G. Le Rider, Alexandre le Grand. Presses universitaires de France (Paris 2003) pp. 332–333; P.G. van Alfen, The ‘owls’ from the 1973 Iraq hoard, American Journal of Numismatics 12, 2000, pp. 9–58 esp. notes 1–2; H.A. Troxell, Studies in the Macedonian coinage of Alexander the Great. Numismatic Studies 21 (Wetteren 1997) p. 74 no. 5 favours 323/322 bc as a date for the burial, but one should consider the need for re-examination of this hoard, which still lacks a complete and satisfying presentation. O. Bopearachchi and Ph. Flandrin, Le portrait d’Alexandre le Grand. Rocher (Paris 2005). 16.75 g, 19 mm. Obv.: Alexander with elephant’s scalp, no diadem/fillet, but horn of Zeus Ammon and a scaly aegis right. – Rev.: Elephant standing right. Same monograms as elephant medallions, but both on reverse. Said to originate from the Mir Zadah Hoard of 1992 from Afghanistan. Fabric and style (especially the sharp outlines) of this coin though seem very uncommon. In addition, the details of the portrait of Alexander raise suspicion, because they mix different characteristics of later Ptolemaic portraits of Alexander of this type. Although there is no diadem/fillet, the scalp is set very high on the forehead and

67

NOTES

14 15 16

17

18

19

20 21 22

23 24

Alexander’s hair is visible just as on coins of Ptolemy of post 317 bc. Alexander is also already equipped with a scaly aegis, which otherwise only appears from 317 bc on. It would be very strange for Ptolemy to have developed such a type without knowing of this gold coin. Why should his coinage then witness a gradual assimilation towards this ‘prototype’ and not use it right from the beginning? See here plate 4. I do, however, agree that this find would change everything we think we know about the development and use of the portrait of Alexander on coins (most obviously an earlier date, possibly in his lifetime). More likely to me seems the possibility of a modern fake, much indebted to Alexander’s portraits on these Ptolemaic coins (and to a lesser degree to Seleukid ones of c. 300–298 bc, and combining characteristics of both). Again, one may note as possible indicators especially the graphic style of the portrait, the extraordinary well-centred dies and appearance of both monograms on a single side of the coin. Price (1981) pp. 32–37. On this site see A. Leonard jr., Ancient Naukratis. Excavations at a Greek emporium in Egypt part I. The Annual of the American School of Oriental Research 54. American School of Oriental Research (Cambridge, Mass. 1997) pp. 1–35. Obv.: Male head right. Below AΛE. – Rev.: Female head wearing necklace right, below NAY. Ref.: E.T. Newell, Miscellanea Numismatica: Cyrene to India. ANS Numismatic Notes and Monographs 82 (1938) pp. 61–62 pl. 4 b; Price (1981) pp. 33, 35 fig. 7; Smith (1988) pp. 12, 59 notes 49, 25; Stewart (1993) pp. 166, 173, 433 no. 2 fig. 51. Obv.: Male head wearing Phrygian-type helmet right. – Rev.: Forepart of Pegasos right, above A, below wreath. Ref.: Price (1981) pp. 32–37 fig. 1–4; M.J. Price, In the wake of Alexander: Coins as evidence for the clash of cultures under the Macedonian Empire in: Praktika tou XII Diethnous synedriou klasikes archaiologias. Athens 4th–10th September 1983 (Athens 1985) pp. 243–246; Price (1991a) pp. 496–497 no. 3960 pl. 149; Smith (1988) pp. 12, 59 notes 49, 12; Stewart (1993) pp. 166, 173, 433 no. 3 fig. 51; SNG Mysie no. 1173 pl. 62. E. Babelon, Les Perses achéménides. Rollin & Feuardent (Paris 1893) p. 56 no. 379 pl. 9. 15; E. Babelon, Traité des monnaies grecques et romaines II 2. (Paris 1910) cols. 121–122 no. 66 pl. 88 fig. 26; J. Babelon, Catalogue de la Collection de Luynes III. J. Florange and L. Ciani Publishers (Paris 1930) p. 102 no. 2900 pl. 107. – For the coins of Orontes see: SNG Mysie nos. 1159–1160 pl. 62. M.J. Price in: G. T. Martin, The sacred animal necropolis at North Saqqara: The southern dependencies of the main temple complex. Excavations at North Saqqara 50. (Oxford 1981) pp. 162–163 nos. 173–175 pl. 46; Price (1981) pp. 32–33, 35 (three coins from recent excavations, one more found in 1981 from another place in Saqqara). See also the notes above. Price (1981) p. 35. Price (1981) p. 35. These Greek communities never hailed Alexander officially as their liberator, although they were quick to show their alliance. See Stewart (1993) pp. 98–99, 166, 307; Stoneman (2004) pp. 32–33; A.B. Bosworth, Conquest and empire. Cambridge University Press (Cambridge 1988) p. 45. Diod. 18.28.2–4; Strab. 17.1.8; Curt. 10.10.20; Arrian, Ta meta Alexandron frag. 1.25 (FGH 156 F 9. 25); 24.1–8 (FRG 156 F 10. 1); Paus. 1.6.3. Stewart (1993) pp. 221, 369–375 T 74–78, 80; Stoneman (2004) p. 110. Stoneman (2004) p. 108; Stewart (1993) pp. 241–243; Billows (1990) p. 159 with references. His coinage is slightly superficially divided by scholars into satrapical coins pre-305/304 bc, and royal types afterwards. On the date of his accession (which took place between 7 Nov. 306 and 6 Nov. 304 bc): O.H. Zervos,

68

NOTES

25

26

27

28

29 30

31

The Delta hoard of Ptolemaic ‘Alexanders’ 1896, ANS Museum Notes 21, 1976, p. 55; A.E. Samuel, Ptolemaic Chronology. Münchner Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung 43, 1962, pp. 4–11. According to Zervos (1974) p. 304 based on the evidence of hoard-finds and the sequence of dies dated between c. 321 and 319 bc, but not before 320 bc in light of historical events such as the death of Kleomenes in 322 bc and that of Perdikkas two years later: compare ibid. pp. 305–308. The new money’s inauguration is in consequence later than Alexander’s funeral in Memphis 321 bc: Ibid. pp. 308, 383. In general though scholars prefer the year 321 bc: Mørkholm (1991) pp. 63–64; Stewart (1993) pp. 231–233. – Kuschel (1961) p. 17 relates Alexander’s appearance to Ptolemy’s victory over Perdikkas in 321 bc and to Ptolemy being able to inflict a wound on the enemy’s leading elephant. See Diod. 18.34.2. The Memphis mint was already active from c. 324/322 bc – certainly from Alexander’s death onwards [Zervos (1974) pp. 292–300, 351] – and produced staters and tetradrachms of Alexander’s types, which down to c. 318 bc run parallel to the new Ptolemaic types (with Alexander’s portrait). Around 320/319 bc the mint in Alexandria opens. An earlier date (326/325 bc) is favoured by Stewart (1993) p. 231 with regard to Zervos (1967) p. 2; G. Le Rider, Les Alexandres d’argent, Journal des Savants 1986, pp. 40–41 (first elephant’s scalp tetradrachms 322/321 bc, in 316/315 bc withdrawing of the Herakles type, from c. 314/313 bc onwards Athena Promachos on reverses, c. 312–310 reduction of weight to 15.70 g and termination of gold coinage, c. 305 bc Ptolemy I/ quadriga of elephants, c. 300 Ptolemy I/eagle-silver). On the location of the mint compare Zervos (1974) pp. 263–275. – Compare now the recent article by C. Lorber, A revised chronology for the coinage of Ptolemy I, The Numismatic Chronicle 2005, pp. 45–64. Obv.: Head of Alexander with scalp of elephant and ram’s horn right, skin knotted below chin. – Rev.: Zeus Aetophoros on throne left, legs crossed and sceptre in left hand. Monograms and symbols below throne. Legend AΛEΞAN∆POY right. Tetradrachms of Attic weight (17.2 g) minted from c. 321–319 bc [Zervos (1974) pp. 303, 308, 351; Zervos (1967) p. 14 table II: c. 322 bc] to 317 bc [Zervos (1974) pp. 303, 314, 351; Zervos (1967) p. 14 table II: 316 bc]. Ref.: Zervos (1974) 69–80 type II (issues 8 to 14 obv. die 259, only issue 8 with Pegasos in left field, issues 9 to 14 with thunderbolt instead); Kuschel (1961) pp. 1–15; Smith (1988) pp. 40–42, 60 a) pl. 74.1 (types combined into one for the period c. 320–315 bc); Svenson (1995) pp. 112–113, 210–211 no. 46 a pl. 54; Mørkholm (1991) p. 63 no. 90 pl. 6; Price (1991a) pp. 33–34; Stewart (1993) p. 231 fig. 76–77. Only the now crossed legs of Zeus are taken from the example of the Alexander mint in Sidon, which uses this feature from 325/324 bc onwards: Zervos (1974) p. 299. – On the Sidon mint see P.V. Wheatley, The year 22 tetradrachm of Sidon, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 144, 2003, pp. 268–276. This feature distinguishes the Indian from the African elephant. Ptolemy had none of either kind in his army: Stewart (1993) p. 235 n. 17. Zervos (1974) pp. 374–375 pl. 1.8–11; 2.1–2. Because only later versions of this type feature a scaly aegis in this part of the skin it is not clear whether an aegis is represented at this early stage already. As the ends of these knots are reminiscent of the shape of serpents this may indeed be considered a transitional phase, later made more distinctive through the addition of scales. – The knots show how closely the elephant type depends on Alexander’s Herakles: Zervos (1974) pp. 374–375, 390; Svenson (1995) p. 113. For this attribute see G. Grimm, Die Vergöttlichung Alexanders des Großen in

69

NOTES

32 33 34 35

36

37

38 39

40

Ägypten und ihre Bedeutung für den ptolemäischen Königskult in: H. Maehler and V.M. Strocka (eds), Das ptolemäische Ägypten. Akten des Internationalen Symposions Berlin 1976. Philipp von Zabern (Mainz 1978) pp. 103, 107; Svenson (1995) pp. 14–15, 145; Smith (1988) p. 40. – Zervos (1974) pp. 390–391; Svenson (1995) p. 15 recognised that this horn originates from a point above the ear, and not behind as previously, hence stopping it from crossing into the opened mouth of the elephant. The latter again resembles the lion’s one of Alexander’s coins. See Stoneman (2004) pp. 47–50; Stewart (1993) pp. 96–97; Zervos (1974) p. 384. Zervos (1974) p. 376; Svenson (1995) pp. 112–113. Zervos (1974) pp. 288–289 with n. 1 naming these exceptions: Corinth (Chiliomodi Hoard), where a Ptolemaic garrison was stationed, and a single coin from Cyprus plus issues from Sidon in Byblos. Obv.: The same but with fillet (‘mitra’). Scalp of elephant moves up the forehead making space for an anastolé. – Rev.: No changes [Zervos (1974) pp. 73, 78 issue 14 obv. die 260 d with additional BAΣIΛEΩΣ in exergue]. Attic tetradrachms of 317 bc: Zervos (1974) 303 [Zervos (1967) p. 14 table II: 320 bc]. Zervos (1974) pp. 78–79, 374 type II (starting with obv. die 260 of issue 14); Smith (1988) 60 a) pl. 74.1 (amalgated into one type, c. 320–315 bc). In contrast to Zervos (1974) p. 375. Compare Bieber (1964) pp. 52–53; Stewart (1993) p. 233; Smith (1988) pp. 34–35, esp. pp. 37–38; G. Grimm, Die Vergöttlichung Alexanders des Großen in Ägypten und ihre Bedeutung für den ptolemäischen Königskult in: H. Maehler and V.M. Strocka (eds), Das ptolemäische Ägypten. Akten des Internationalen Symposions Berlin 1976. Philipp von Zabern (Mainz 1978) pp. 103, 108; Svenson (1995) pp. 29–30; LIMC III (1986) p. 414 s. v. Dionysos (A. Veneri). Obv.: Same but now larger compartment of skin at bottom and with scaly aegis. – Rev.: No changes. Attic tetradrachms of 317/316 bc: Zervos (1974) pp. 303, 314–315 [Zervos (1967) p. 14 table II: 315 bc]. Ref.: Zervos (1974) pp. 80, 374–375 type II (issue 15, from now on with eagle on thunderbolt in left field, obv. die 263 introduces new style adopted from later versions); Smith (1988) 60 no. 1 a pl. 74.1 (amalgated into one type, c. 320–315 bc); Mørkholm (1991) p. 64 no. 91 pl. 6; Stewart (1993) pp. 231, 434 no. 2 (c. 314–313 bc). Svenson (1995) p. 113. Obv.: As before. – Rev.: Athena (Promachos) with shield and spear right. Right field eagle on thunderbolt left and various letters and monograms. Left AΛEΞAN∆POY or AΛEΞAN∆PEION ΠTOΛEMAIOY or AΛEΞAN∆PEION. Tetradrachms of Attic weight, later reduced to 15.7 g. Drachms and Hemidrachms of 3.75 g and 1.9 g respectively. Inaugurated 316/315 bc: Ref.: Zervos (1974) p. 315 [Zervos (1967) p. 14 table II: 314 bc]. Terminating according to Zervos (1974) pp. 339, 344, 351, 375 in 301 bc. Ref.: Zervos (1974) pp. 81–250, 374–375 type III (56 issues, reduced in weight 312/311 bc); Svenson (1995) pp. 112–113 no. 46 e pl. 54; Smith (1988) p. 60 no. 1 b pl. 74.2 (from c. 325 bc onwards); Mørkholm (1991) p. 64 no. 92 pl. 6; Price (1991a) pp. 33–34, 496; Stewart (1993) pp. 231, 434 no. 2 pl. 8 fig. 78. – For the discussion of the term Alexandreion see Zervos (1974) pp. 321–326; Stewart (1993) pp. 238–240. The exact identification of Athena’s epithet remains under discussion: Athena Promachos: LIMC II (1984) p. 973 no. 159 pl. 723 s. v. Athena (P. Demargne). – Athena defending the people: A.B. Brett, Athena AΛKI∆HMOΣ of Pella. ANS Museum Notes 4, 1950, pp. 55–72. Compare Kuschel (1961) p. 11; Stewart (1993) p. 239 n. 34.

70

NOTES

41 Zervos (1974) pp. 316–320, 323, 326, 351; Price (1991a) p. 496 (c. 310 bc). 42 Obv.: Head of Alexander wearing an elephant’s scalp, mitra, scaly aegis and ram’s horn right. – Rev.: Prora right. Staters of Attic weight, c. 315–312/310 bc [Zervos (1974) pp. 226, 228, 351]. Ref.: Stewart (1993) p. 434 no. 2; G.K. Jenkins, A Catalogue of the Calouste Gulbenkian Collection of Greek Coins II. Fundação C. Gulbenkian (Lisbon 1989) pp. 160–161 no. 1071 pl. 98; Svoronos nos. 25 α–β pl. 1. 22–23; Svenson (1995) p. 211 no. 46 b; Zervos (1974) pp. 226–227 issue 87. 43 Zervos (1974) pp. 226–227 stresses their similarity to his workshop A and would accept that the same die-cutter was responsible. They are most probably related to his issues 16–21, especially issue 21, as it witnesses the termination of the earlier Athena/Nike-staters, and their fabric is similar, too. 44 Zervos (1974) pp. 288, 313. Compare ibid. p. 226 n. 1: the Paris coin possibly originates from Saida/Sidon in modern Lebanon. 45 There were two campaigns in Cyprus in 313 bc and the years to follow: W. Huß, Ägypten in hellenistischer Zeit. Verlag C.H. Beck (Munich 2001) pp. 150–151, 159–160; G. Hölbl, A history of the Ptolemaic Empire. Routledge (London 2001) pp. 18–19. Compare Huß ibid. pp. 170–171; Hölbl ibid. p. 191 (on the expulsion of Nikokles, king of Paphos, in 310 bc). 46 Obv.: Head of Ptolemy I with diadem and aegis right. – Rev.: Alexander, diademed, standing left in chariot with four elephants, driving left. Holds thunderbolt in right hand and reins in left (and possibly another undetermined object (sceptre), see BMC Cyrenaica p. 73 n. 1). Aegis on left shoulder. Legend either mostly horizontal (Kyrene) or slightly curved (Alexandria): ΠTOΛEMAIOY / BAΣIΛEΩΣ plus symbols or monograms. Gold staters of reduced weight (7.10 g) of Ptolemy I, from Kyrene, Euhesperides and Alexandria of c. 305–298 bc. Ref.: BMC Cyrenaica pp. CXLVII–CXLVIII, 73 nos. 1–2; Bieber (1964) p. 54; O. Mørkholm, Kyrene and Ptolemy I. Some numismatic comments, Chiron 10, 1980, pp. 145–159; Mørkholm (1991) pp. 65, 69 nos. 96, 122 pl. 6–7; Svoronos nos. 101–103, 105, 111, 112, 116, 121–122, 126, 131, 133, 147, 150, 151–152 pl. 4.1–7, 18–22; 5.1–4; L. Naville, Les Monnaies d’or de la Cyrénaïque. Atar S.A. (Geneva 1951) pp. 79–82 nos. 239–247 pl. 7; Zervos (1974) type VI pp. 228–235 (Alexandria) 253–262 (Kyrene); O.H. Zervos, The Delta hoard of Ptolemaic ‘Alexanders’ 1896, ANS Museum Notes 21, 1976, p. 55; Neuffer (1929) p. 14 nos. 29; Michel (1967) pp. 30, 34 pl. 8.3; F. Matz, Der Gott auf dem Elephantenwagen. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur. Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Klasse. F. Steiner (Mainz/Wiesbaden 1952) p. 745; Stewart (1993) p. 435 no. 4 fig. 76 c; Svenson (1995) pp. 14, 194, 196, 206 nos. 16b and 33. 47 For their chronology and monograms shared with silver coins see Zervos (1974) p. 228. For issues from Kyrene with links to local coins ibid. p. 255. 48 Athenaios 5. 201 d-e; Stewart (1993) pp. 252–260, 385–386 T 96. 49 Some chariot-staters (from all mints) were part of the Aisaros hoard in southern Italy: Zervos (1974) p. 260. 50 Stewart (1993) p. 261. 51 This is remarkable in that except for Zeus Ammon only the portrait of Ptolemy and of no one else appears. See Zervos (1974) 384 and n. 2. 52 Obv.: Head of Alexander with ram’s horn wearing a mitra, with short hair, right. – Rev.: Eagle on thunderbolt, various additional symbols. Legend AΛE or AΛEΞAN∆ respectively. Bronze coins in various sizes of c. 316–305 bc. Ref.: Zervos (1974) pp. 341–342, 377–378, 396–397, 399; Svoronos nos. 17, 31, 46, 51–54, 56–58 pl. 2. 8–9, 25, 29–35; SNG Copenhagen nos. 31–35 pl. 2; Stewart

71

NOTES

53

54 55 56 57 58 59 60

61

62 63 64

(1993) pp. 243, 434–435 no. 3 fig. 76 i); Svenson (1995) pp. 15, 75–76, 297 no. 310.2 pl. 7. Compare ibid. p. 300 no. 322.1 pl. 33. Obv.: Ditto, but with longer hair. – Rev.: Variant I again with eagle on thunderbolt. Legend now ΠTOΛEMAIOY. – Variant II: ditto, but legend ΠTOΛEMAIOY BAΣIΛEΩΣ. Bronze coins of c. 305–283 bc. Ref.: Variant I: Zervos (1974) pp. 341–342, 377–378, 396–397, 399; Svoronos nos. 115, 135, 155–157, 163, 172 pl. 4.13–17; 5.25–26; 6.16–18; SNG Copenhagen nos. 36–43 pl. 11; Stewart (1993) pp. 243, 434–435 no. 3 ii). – Variant II: Svoronos nos. 238–239 pl. 8. 14–18; SNG Copenhagen nos. 58–62 pl. 11. – Svenson (1995) p. 300 no. 322 a-b pl. 33 mixing up this and the earlier type. Zervos (1974) p. 378. Svenson (1995) pp. 14–15 with references. Svenson (1995) p. 15; Zervos (1974) pp. 390–391. Svenson (1995) p. 17. Zervos (1974) p. 378 n. 1. A phenomenon known also from small-scale portraits of Alexander in the round, which were mainly used in private, domestic rites. Compare Smith (1988) p. 88. Obv.: Alexander with elephant’s scalp, ram’s horn, sometimes mitra visible, and aegis. – Rev.: Eagle on thunderbolt, monogram left. ΠTOΛEMAIOY BAΣIΛEΩΣ. Bronze coins of c. 305–283 bc. Ref.: Svoronos nos. 186, 188, 196, 215, 220, 225, 226, 235, 237 pl. 8.6–13; SNG Copenhagen nos. 50–57 pl. 11; Svenson (1995) p. 212 nos. 46–47. Obv.: Ditto, but without mitra. – Rev.: Ditto, but from 246–222 bc onwards, eagle with head turned backwards or wings down. Monograms and symbols left. Bronze coins in various denominations of c. 285–222 bc (some authors date from 261 bc on) under Ptolemaios II (until 246 bc) and Ptolemaios III (until 222 bc). Ref.: Svoronos nos. 356, 363, 379, 382, 439–440, 450, 451, 562, 601, 602, 625, 763 (Sidon) pl. 10.24; 11.3, 9, 13, 21; 12.15; 13.25–26; 14.10, 12–14; 17.14–17 (Ptol. II); ibid. nos. 969, 971, 976 pl. 29, 14, 24, 26 (Ptol. III); Stewart (1993) p. 435 no. 5; SNG Copenhagen nos. 94–95, 99, 131, 158–162, 183–184, 188 pl. 3–4; 6–7; Svenson (1995) p. 212 no. 46–47; Mørkholm (1991) pp. 105–106 no. 305 pl. 19 and table 2–3. – Ditto under Ptolemaios IV (221– 205 bc): Svoronos no. 976 pl. 29. 14; SNG Copenhagen no. 232 pl. 9. Svoronos nos. 1236, 1239 pl. 40.13; 50.16–17; SNG Copenhagen nos. 249–252, 260 pl. 9; Svenson (1995) p. 108 n. 516 (not Alexander). Stewart (1993) p. 243. Obv.: Head of Alexander with elephant’s scalp and aegis right. – Rev.: Winged Athena Promachos (with helmet, shield and spear) right. Legend AΓAΘOKΛEOΣ (Vienna) or AΓAΘOKΛEIOΣ (Basel and Bank Leu). Owl in right field. Gold staters of Agathokles of Syracuse, c. 310–307 bc from the mint of Syracuse. Ref.: A.J. Evans, Contributions to Sicilian numismatics, The Numismatic Chronicle 1894, pp. 189–242, esp. pp. 237–242 pl. 8.6 (Vienna); W. Giesecke, Sicilia Numismatica (Leipzig 1923) p. 91 pl. 21.7 (ditto); Ierardi (1995/1996) pp. 16–20 pl. 1.8, 10 (Vienna and Basel); Kuschel (1961) pp. 14–15 pl. 1.12; Zervos (1974) p. 393; Bank Leu Zürich Auction 42, 12 May 1987, lot 133 pl. 10 (Bank Leu, 8.54 g, 6 h); H.A. Cahn and L. Mildenberg et al., Griechische Münzen aus Großgriechenland und Sizilien. Antikenmuseum Basel und Sammlung Ludwig. (Basel 1988) pp. 143–144 no. 511 pl. 47 (Basel, 8.46 g, 2 h); Stewart (1993) pp. 266–267, 432–433 fig. 87; Svoronos IV pp. 14–15 with fig. (Vienna); E. Babelon, Alexandre ou l’Afrique, Aréthuse 1, 1923/1924 no. 3, pp. 95–107 esp. 101–103; D. Bérend, De l’or d’Agathocle in: R. Ashton and S. Hurter (eds), Studies in Greek Numismatics in memory of Martin Jessop Price. Spink (London 1998)

72

NOTES

65

66

67

68

69

70 71 72 73

74

pp. 37–41 pl. 9.2. – For the reverse compare F. Imhoof-Blumer, Die Flügelgestalten der Athena und Nike auf Münzen, Numismatische Zeitschrift 3, 1871, p. 4 pl. 5.2; LIMC II (1984) p. 973 no. 160 pl. 722 s. v. Athena (P. Demargne). According to E. Babelon, Alexandre ou l’Afrique, Aréthuse 1, 1923/1924 no. 3, p. 102; Kuschel (1961) p. 14–15. Against this view H.A. Cahn and L. Mildenberg et al., Griechische Münzen aus Großgriechenland und Sizilien. Antikenmuseum Basel und Sammlung Ludwig (Basel 1988) p. 143. In the case of Agathokles this phenomenon is not restricted to Ptolemaic coinage, and there are similarities with Seleukid types, too (active and passive parts not identified, however). Tetradrachms of c. 305–295 bc (SNG ANS 5. Sicily III (Wetteren 1988) nos. 664–681 pl. 22 with ref.) feature Nike erecting a trophy. Ierardi (1995/1996) pp. 37–38 dates this issue to c. 310–308 bc and therefore before the Seleukid ones. Ophellas joined forces with Syracuse and after his death Agathokles managed to take over the latter’s mercenary army: Diod. 20.40–42. Ophellas himself had certainly tried to turn Agathokles into an ally, shielding him against Ptolemy. For a discussion see Stewart (1993) pp. 267–269. Compare Kuschel (1961) p. 15; Ierardi (1995/1996) p. 19. – Agathokles’ marriage to the Ptolemaic princess Theoxena, stepdaughter of Ptolemy I in 305 bc [Der Neue Pauly 1 (1996) pp. 238–239 s. v. Agathokles 2) (K. Meister)] is much too late to have played any role. See the episode in Diod. 20.11.3–5. Compare A.J. Evans, Contributions to Sicilian numismatics, The Numismatic Chronicle 1894, pp. 238–239. An owl guaranteeing victory is common in ancient sources: Plut. Themist. 12.1; Aristoph., Wasps 1086. It is true that one must suspect this colourful story was made up only after the event. Ierardi (1995/1996) p. 19. Especially the change in Agathokles’ name. Compare Stewart (1993) p. 268 and n. 15–16; Stribrny (1991) p. 380. And conveniently saving some of Alexander’s glory for his latest admirer. Agathokles and Alexander were two of a kind: Plautus, Mostellaria 775–776; Stewart (1993) p. 269 with n. 18; Spencer (2002) p. 165. With reverse type anchor upside down and head of (mostly horned) horse right. Legend AΛEΞAN∆POY. Obv.: Head of Alexander wearing elephant’s scalp right. No anastolé, fillet/mitra or horns of Zeus Ammon. – Seleukid bronzes of various sizes from Susa, c. 300–298 bc. Ref.: ESM pp. 109–110 nos. 291, 297 pl. 22.10, 20; Price (1991a) p. 489 nos. 3879–3881 pl. 149; SC I no. 188.1–2; 190 pl. 67; Svenson (1995) pp. 107–108, 221 no. 72 a. a 1. SC I no. 190, Price (1991a) nos. 3880–3881 = SNG Kopenhagen no. 1066 horse’s head without horns. Ditto from Ekbatana with legend in centre: SC I p. 88 no. 223 pl. 68. – With reverse type of Nike holding wreath and stylis, anchor upside down in left field, same legend from Susa: ESM pp. 109–110 nos. 294–296 pl. 22.14–19; Price (1991a) p. 489 nos. 3875–3877 pl. 149; SC I p. 76 no. 189.1–3 pl. 67; Svenson (1995) pp. 107–108, 221 no. 72 b. – Ditto with additional head of horned horse from Ekbatana: ESM pp. 170–171 no. 459 pl. 35.4–5; Price (1991a) p. 492 no. 3916 pl. 149; SC I no. 222 pl. 67; Stewart (1993) p. 435 no. 1; Svoronos nos. 97–100 pl. 1.29–35 (erroneously considered Ptolemaic); Svenson (1995) pp. 107–108, 221 no. 72 b, 1). Ditto, no legend. Paris specimen with anastolé. Scales or dots on the aegis. Seleukid double darics from Ekbatana, c. 300–298 bc. Ref.: ESM p. 171 no. 460 pl. 35.6–7; SC I p. 87 no. 219 pl. 12; SNG Newnham Davis, Aberdeen (London 1936) no. 469 pl. 22; Hadley (1974) pp. 52–53; Smith (1988) p. 60 no. 2 a pl. 74.3; Stewart (1993) p. 435 no. 1 fig. 115; Svenson (1995) pp. 107–108, 221

73

NOTES

75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82

83 84 85 86

87

no. 72 b 2 pl. 52. – From the Susa mint: SC I p. 75 no. 183 pl. 10. – Darics from the Babylon mint: SC I p. 48 no. 101 pl. 6. ESM p. 112; WSM p. 380. Facial features and style vary greatly among obverse dies in gold: Smith (1988) p. 60. Stewart (1993) pp. 313–314. SC I p. 7; Stewart (1993) p. 315; Hadley (1974) p. 53 (stressing, however, the aspect of the divine); ESM p. 112. Stewart (1993) pp. 312, 315; Billows (1990) pp. 175–185. SC I p. 7. Seleukos was nicknamed ‘leader of the elephants’ by the court of Demetrios: Plut. Demetr. 25.4. See Stewart (1993) p. 320 n. 95 with references. There is a controversy about the identification of the person represented on the obverse of silver coins of Seleukos I from Susa. They show a young male head wearing a helmet of the Attic type decorated with a panther’s skin and a bull’s horn. Although there cannot be absolute certainty mainly because of the head’s idealised physiognomy [see Hoover (2002) esp. pp. 56–59] the fact that Alexander is never represented with a bull’s horn and that he has no literary connection with taurine attributes favours Seleukos, who in contrast is and does. For the coins see: Fleischer (1991) p. 5 pl. 57 b (Alexander); ESM p. 113 nos. 300–302 pl. 23.6–9; pp. 154–156 nos. 413–427 pl. 32.1–18 (Seleukos); SC I pp. 71–73 nos. 173 [4dr] 174 [dr] 175 [½ dr] 176 [AR-obol] (Dionysiac hero); WSM p. 26 no. 421A pl. 2.25 (Seleukos); R.A. Hadley, Seleucus, Dionysus, or Alexander?, The Numismatic Chronicle 1974, p. 9–13 (Alexander); Smith (1988) p. 60 pl. 74.4 (Alexander); Stewart (1993) pp. 234–245, 237, 435 no. 2 fig. 114, 116 (Alexander); A. Houghton and A. Stewart, The equestrian portrait of Alexander the Great on a new Tetradrachm of Seleucus I, Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau 78, 1999, pp. 29–30, 32 pl. 5.2 (Alexander); Hoover (2002) pp. 51–60 pl. 6.1 (Seleukos, including earlier references). For the life of Lysimachos see Lund (1992). His assumption of kingship ibid. p. 68, Kurupedion pp. 205–206. See Thompson (1968) esp. pp. 163–168 for this section. Lund (1992) pp. 6–8; Thompson (1968) p. 165; Stewart (1993) p. 318; Bosworth (2002) pp. 275–277. Obv.: Head of Alexander wearing diadem and ram’s horn right. – Rev.: Athena Nikephoros with Corinthian helmet sitting left, holds in her right hand Nike left, in right hand spear with point downwards. Nike holds a wreath above the first letter of Lysimachos’ name. On the right a round shield with a Gorgoneion (head of Medusa) on it leaning against the throne. Various symbols and monograms. Legend right BAΣlΛEΩΣ, left ΛYΣIMAXOY. Staters, tetradrachms and silver fractions of Lysimachos from mints in Thrace and Asia of 297/296–281 bc. Ref.: Bieber (1964) pp. 53–54 fig. 43–46; Thompson (1968); B.R. Brown, Styles in the Alexander portraits on the coins of Lysimachus in: L. Casson (ed.), Coins, culture, and history in the ancient world. Numismatic and other studies in honor of B.L. Trell. Wayne State University Press (Detroit 1981) pp. 17–27; Smith (1988) p. 60 pl. 74.5–6; Cahn (1991) pp. 84–98; Stewart (1993) pp. 318–321, 433 fig. 117 pl. 8. In general thought to derive from the famous statue of Athena in the Parthenon of Athens: LIMC II (1984) pp. 978, 1031 no. 225 (P. Demargne). Marinescu (1996) p. 34, however, points out the major differences concerning the figure of Nike, and assumes that Attic votive reliefs of the fourth century bc may provide prototypes. Compare M. Mangold, Athenatypen auf attischen Weihreliefs des 5.

74

NOTES

88

89 90 91

92

93 94 95

96 97

98 99

und 4. Jhs. v. Chr. Hefte des Archäologischen Seminars der Universität Bern. Beiheft 2 (Berne 1993) pp. 29, 32 pl. 6.1, 3. Ditto. With symbols/monograms on rev. Posthumous Lysimachi in gold, silber and bronze denominations in the name of various cities and the Thracian ruler Skostokos (second third of third century bc). Ref.: Mørkholm (1991) 145–148; SNG Aulock nos. 8098–8100 (the latter in bronze) pl. 280; Stewart (1993) p. 327; M.H. Crawford, Coinage and money under the Roman republic. Cambridge University Press (Cambridge 1985) pp. 116–132; Marinescu (1996) passim on Byzantium and Chalcedon; U. Peter, Die Münzen der thrakischen Dynasten (5.–3. Jahrhundert v. Chr.). Akademie Verlag (Berlin 1997) pp. 218, 220; W. Fischer-Bossert, Die Lysimacheier des Skostokos, Revue Belge de Numismatique 151, 2005, pp. 49–74. – For the development in style see Marinescu (1996) p. 35. Cahn (1991) pp. 84–86, 92, 94; Marinescu (1996) pp. 32–33 n. 6; 341–342 (interpreting these variants as indicators for the sequence of issues). Compare Thompson (1968) p. 174. LIMC I (1981) pp. 666–689 s. v. Ammon (J. Leclant and G. Clerc); Stewart (1993) pp. 319–320. Nor does it represent the influence of Arsinoë, the wife of Lysimachos and a Ptolemaic princess (see J.G. Milne, Arsinoë and Ammun in: Studies presented to F.L. Griffith. Oxford University Press (London 1932) pp. 13–15. – Not acceptable is a Dionysiac context, as supposed by J.P. Guépin, Leonine browns and the shadow of Pyrgoteles, Bulletin Antieke Beschaving 39, 1964, pp. 131–132, nor Alexander’s alleged posthumous support for the anti-Antigonid coalition as reported in a dream of Demetrios (Plut. Demetr. 29.1). See Hadley (1974) pp. 56, 63. Stewart (1993) pp. 319–320. – Less elaborated Marinescu (1996) p. 33: Horn of Zeus Ammon reflecting Alexander’s close relationship to the god and his visit to the oracle thus strengthening Lysimachos’ present legitimacy by stressing his association with the new god Alexander. In tradition of the vulgate or Kleitarchos respectively: Diod. 17.51.1–3; Curt. 4.7.25–27; Iustin. Epit. 11.11.7–11. Compare. Plut. Alexander. 27.5–7. Stewart (1993) p. 320. Obv.: Ditto, but possibly without diadem. – Rev.: Lion walking left. In exergue TEΛEMHΣΣEΩN. Above monogram ΠT. Bronze coins of Ptolemaios (born c. 299/297 bc, son of king Lysimachos and Arsinoë II), ruler of Telmessos in Lykia c. 240 bc. Ref.: G.F. Hill, Greek coins acquired by the British Museum, The Numismatic Chronicle 1912, p. 145 no. 24 pl.7.8; G.F. Hill, Coins of southern Asia Minor in: Anatolian Studies. Festschrift W. Ramsey. Manchester University Press (Manchester 1923) pp. 207–212 no. 3 pl. 9.4. – For this identification see W. Huß, Noch einmal: Ptolemaios der Sohn, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 149, 2004, p. 232 (with references). Compare SNG Tübingen nos. 962–968 pl. 40. The chronology and sequence of these kings (including the question of parallel reigns) is still under discussion. The controversial models published so far by Mitchiner (1975), Bopearachchi (1991) and A.K. Narain, The Greeks of Bactria and India in: A.E. Astin (ed.), The Cambridge Ancient History VIII. Second Edition. The Cambridge University Press (Cambridge 1989) pp. 388–421, esp. table Appendix I p. 420, are far from being widely accepted. Stewart (1993) p. 396. Obv.: Head of Alexander wearing a lion’s scalp right. Legend right AΛEΞAN∆POY, left TOY ΦIΛIΠΠOY. – Rev.: Zeus Aetophoros holding sceptre in his left hand sitting on throne left, legs crossed. Right BAΣIΛEYONTOΣ, left AΓAΘOKΛEOYΣ, in exergue ∆IKAIOY. Tetradrachm (pedigree

75

NOTES

100 101

102 103

104 105 106 107 108

coins) of King Agathokles, c. 185–170 bc. Ref.: A. von Sallet, Alexander der Grosse als Gründer der baktrisch-indischen Reiche, Zeitschrift für Numismatik 8, 1881, pp. 279–280; Schreiber (1903) p. 176; Bieber (1964) p. 64 fig. 75; M. Mitchiner, Indo-Greek and Indo-Scythian coinage I. Hawkins Publications (London 1975) pp. 66, 78 no. 142 (dates 171–168 bc); F.L. Holt, The so-called ‘pedigree-coins’ of the Bactrian Greeks in: W. Heckel and R. Sullivan (eds), Ancient coins of the Graeco-Roman world. The Nickle Numismatic papers. (Waterloo, Ont. 1974) pp. 69–91, esp. pp. 73–74, 88–89 type 1; Price (1991a) p. 33; O. Bopearachchi, Monnaies gréco-baktriennes et indo-grecques. Bibliothèque Nationale (Paris 1991) p. 177 nos. 21–22 pl. 8; Stewart (1993) pp. 326, 432 fig. 121; Triton VIII New York (CNG 68), Auction 11–12 January 2005, lot 633. For the very controversial discussion of the attempt to identify Alexander already in lifetime coins of the Herakles-type see section on portrait-types below. Obv.: Head of Alexander with long hair and small ram’s horn right. Below MAKE∆ONΩN (few variants with additional CAE PR ahead). Various monograms. – Rev.: From left to right Cista (chest), club of Herakles and Sella curulis (a magistrate’s chair). Above either AESILLAS / Q or in rare cases SVVRA LEG / PRO Q in two lines. Laurel wreath. Tetradrachms and drachms of Attic weight in the name of Aesillas or Sura or a CAE PR, from the province of Makedonia, c. 90–70 bc. Ref.: Bauslaugh (2000) passim; de Callataÿ (1996) pp. 113–151; de Callataÿ (1997) pp. 299–300; de Callataÿ (1998) pp. 113–117; Bieber (1964) p. 70 fig. 87; Stewart (1993) pp. 328–330, 432 fig. 123; Smith (1988) p. 123 pl. 74.7. A small number of obverses have an additional CAE PR identifying the issuer: Bauslaugh (2000) pp. 62–65. In contrast to earlier provincial and national types it has moved there from the reverse: ibid. p. 21. Resembling portraits of Mithradates VI of Pontos and a few Herakles-type Alexanders of this period (late second to early first century bc). See Smith (1988) pp. 122–123; Stewart (1993) p. 337; Price (1991a) nos. 1181 b, 1193 b (of the Odessa mint). See also portraits of the Seleukid pretender Tryphon [see also Smith (1988) p. 121 pl. 80.4; C. Bohm, Imitatio Alexandri im Hellenismus. TuduvVerlagsgesellschaft (Munich 1988) pp. 116–127] and the kings Alexander I Balas, Antiochos IV and VI: R. Fleischer, Studien zur Seleukidischen Kunst I. Herrscherbildnisse. Philipp von Zabern (Mainz 1991) pp. 60–64, 67–68 pl. 31 c. 32 e. 37 a, each with similar, but slightly different hair. This leads to the question whether Alexander’s portrait influenced these late Hellenistic kings or vice versa: Smith (1988) p. 123; de Callataÿ (1997) p. 261. – Compare Alexander’s statue on horseback as the founder of Alexandria described by Pseudo-Libanios, Progymnasmata 27. 4 in c. ad 400. See Stewart (1993) pp. 252, 397–398 S 18 and T 126. Bauslaugh (2000) p. 111. See Bauslaugh (2000) pp. 21–22 for a detailed description of the similarities and differences between the Aesillas-type coinage and earlier and contemporary coin-types. But compare Bauslaugh (2000) p. 23 pl. 14 with the suggestion of identifying Aesillas’ and Sura’s name in monograms in money of the Thasian type. For this section compare Bauslaugh (2000) pp. 23–26, 112–115. For Sura see ibid. p. 23 n. 15 with references and Plut. Sulla 11.6–8; Appian, Mithr. 29. See also Stewart (1993) pp. 328–330 for the historical background. Stewart (1993) p. 329 n. 15 with references. On C. Sentius and the events of the Mithradatic war in Greece see F. Papazoglou, La province de Macédoine in: ANRW 7.1 (Berlin 1979) pp. 316–318.

76

NOTES

109 de Callataÿ (1997) pp. 315–320. 110 Bauslaugh (2000) p. 26. 111 For this discussion of identifying CAE PR see Bauslaugh (2000) pp. 23–26, 114–115 with references. 112 Bauslaugh (2000) pp. 109–110, 112–113. 113 Ibid. pp. 112–113; Stewart (1993) p. 330. 114 Bauslaugh (2000) pp. 22, 112–113 with references. – Keeping in mind the hoard evidence there is no reason to accept the use of coins of the Aesillas type as payments for Macedonian forces supporting Rome: such a view is taken by Stewart (1993) p. 330; de Callataÿ (1998) p. 117. 115 On Alexander as a founder of cities, reviewing both alleged foundations and those with a historical record including later claims of the Hellenistic and Roman periods see: Leschhorn (1984) pp. 203–204, 212–223; Stewart (1993) pp. 94–95, 307–312; Stoneman (2004) p. 117. 116 On this region see RPC I pp. 581–582; RPC II p. 246; Ziegler (2003) pp. 115–131. 117 On the Issos campaign see Stoneman (2004) pp. 36–41; Stewart (1993) pp. 134–150 with references in n. 40. 118 Obv.: Head of Herakles wearing lion’s scalp (Alexander Ktistes) right. – Rev.: Zeus standing left, wreath in hand (SNG Aulock no. 8667 with thunderbolt). Legend right AΛEΞAN∆PEΩN, in left field one or two monograms, some with Λ in exergue. Bronze coins of Alexandria kat’Isson/Kilikia from the second/ first century bc. Ref.: BMC Lycaonia, Isauria, and Cilicia p. 29 nos. 2–4 pl. 5.7; SNG Aulock no. 5464, 8867 pl. 182, 302; SNG Levante nos. 1834–1839 pl. 124; SNG Cilicie nos. 2406–2412 pl. 135–136; R. Ziegler, Münzen Kilikiens aus kleineren deutschen Sammlungen. Vestigia 42. C.H. Beck (Munich 1989) p. 179 no. 1420 pl. 71; SNG PPS no. 82 pl. 5; Ziegler (1998) pp. 682–684. 119 Alexander Ktistes: Ziegler (1998) p. 682 with notes 21–22. History has granted the foundation to either Antigonos Monophthalmos or Seleukos I (compare App. Syr. 57; Strab. 13.1.26) in honour and memory of Alexander. Compare Ziegler (1998) p. 683. 120 Ziegler (1998) p. 683 n. 23; H. Seyrig, Cachets d’archives publiques de quelques villes de la Syrie romaine, Mélanges de l’Université Saint-Joseph Beyrouth 23, 1940, p. 97 no. 20 pl. 6. 121 Obv.: Head of Herakles (Alexander) with scalp of lion right. – Rev.: Zeus left, holding wreath. Legend right AΛEΞAN∆PEΩN, left ET (etous/year) / IP (110). Bronze coins of Alexandria kat’Isson from ad 43/44 (= year 110 of civic era). Ref.: RPC I no. 4076 pl. 154; Levante (1971) pp. 95–96, 99 no. 62–63 pl. 18. 122 Obv.: Draped bust of Alexander with diadem right. – Rev.: Dionysos standing left with panther, thyrsos and kantharos. Legend right ET IP AΛEΞAN –, left ∆PEΩN plus variant with year in left field. Bronze coins of Alexandria kat’Isson of ad 43/44 (year 110). Ref.: RPC I no. 4075 pl. 154; SNG Levante nos. 1841– 1842 pl. 124; SNG Cilicie nos. 2414–2416 pl. 136; Ziegler (1998) pp. 682–683; F. Imhoof-Blumer, Kleinasiatische Münzen II. A. Hölder (Vienna 1902) p. 430 nos. 5–6; M.I. Rostovtzeff, Le Gad de Doura et Seleucus Nicator in: Mélanges syriens offerts à R. Dussaud. I.P. Geuthner (Paris 1939) p. 287 (Seleukos I); Leschhorn (1984) pp. 222–223, 236 n. 1. 123 For the use of an era: RPC I p. 38 and 597 for Alexandria at the Issos; RPC I–II under the heading of each city. In general see W. Leschhorn, Antike Ären. Historia Einzelschriften 81. Franz Steiner Verlag (Stuttgart 1993). 124 It also appears as a countermark of this city under Trajan: SNG Levante no. 1847 pl. 124 = Howgego (1985) p. 124 no. 101 pl. 5 (‘male head r(ight), diademed?’).

77

NOTES

125 Obv.: Draped and armoured bust of Severus Alexander with wreath of laurel right. AVT KA MA [. . .] AV CE AΛEΞA∆POC (sic). – Rev.: Diademed head of Alexander right. AΛEΞAN∆PEΩN KAT ICCON ET HOC. Bronze coins of Alexandria kat’Isson of ad 231/232 (= year 298 of local era). Ref.: SNG Levante no. 1851 pl. 125 = Levante (1971) pp. 95–96, 101 no. 96 pl. 19. 126 Obv.: Laureate bust of Trajan right. AVTOKP KAIC NEP TPAIANOC APICT CEB ΓEPM ∆AK. – Rev.: Alexander with coat seen from the front, holds a spear pointing downwards (rather than a sceptre) in left hand, in right hand a bowl (phial). AΛEΞAN∆PEΩN KAT ICCON ETOVC AΠP or year in left field (SNG Levante no. 1845; SNG Leypold). Bronze coins of Alexandria kat’Isson from ad 113/114 (= year 181 of local era). Ref.: SNG Aulock no. 5465 pl. 182 (Zeus); Levante (1971) p. 99 nos. 72–76 pl. 18 (Zeus); SNG Levante nos. 1844 (= SNG Aulock no. 5466 pl. 182), 1845 pl. 124 (hero, presumably Alexander); SNG PPS no. 83 pl. 5 (Alexander); SNG Leypold II no. 2219 (Ktistes). 127 Obv.: Laureate head of Caracalla right. AVT K M A ANTΩNINOC CEB. – Rev.: Ditto, but spear point downwards. AΛEΞAN∆P–EΩN KAT ICCON. In left field ET B – ΠC. Bronze coins of Alexandria kat’Isson from ad 215/216 (= year 282). Ref.: Levante (1971) p. 101 nos. 88–89 pl. 19 (emperor); SNG Cilicie no. 2418 pl. 136 (presumably Alexander). 128 Weiß (1996) p. 162 fig. 12–13 (Prusa ad Olympum). 129 Compare for this section Ziegler (1998) pp. 684–686. 130 Ziegler (1998) p. 685. – Also Perseus is named as a (mythological) founder: Strubbe (1984–1986) pp. 262–263; Ziegler (1998) p. 685 with n. 42. On coins we would expect him to be identified by his characteristic attributes harpa (sword) and cap. For Perseus in general see LIMC VII (1994) pp. 332–348 s. v. Perseus (L. Jones Roccos). 131 Ziegler (1998) p. 685 n. 38 names Blaundos and Hyrkanis in Lydia, Peltai and Dokimeion in Phrygia. – On eugeneia see Strubbe (1984–1986) p. 286. 132 On these titles (Makedoniké, Eugenés, Pisté, Theophilé) see P. Weiß, Ein Altar für Gordian III., die älteren Gordiane und die Severer aus Aigeai, Chiron 12, 1982, pp. 203–204 with n. 53; Ziegler (2003) p. 119. – Makedoniké: e.g. SNG Levante no. 1741 pl. 117. – The epithet Alexandroupolis granted in ad 228/ 229: Ziegler (1989) p. 175 with no. 1392. 133 Ziegler (1998) p. 686 n. 43, again at the latest from ad 215 onwards. 134 See the colourful description in chapter 23 of the Alexander Romance, a fictitious letter of Alexander to his mother Olympias and to his teacher Aristoteles. See H. van Thiel (ed./transl.), Leben und Taten Alexanders von Makedonien (1974) p. 104; Stoneman (1991) pp. 114–115. – Compare Ziegler (1998) p. 684 n. 34 with additional references and Strubbe (1984–1986) pp. 270–272. – For Hyperesia see Paus. 7.26.2–3. Compare Iustin. 7.1 for Edessa in Makedonia. 135 SNG Levante nos. 1751, 1753, 1754 (this particular one without torches) pl. 118. 136 As a result of Aigeai joining the party of Macrinus after the death of Caracalla, who very much favoured the rival Tarsos: Ziegler (2003) pp. 129–130. 137 Obv.: Male head right (Alexander? Or Seleukid king) with anastolé and diadem (see esp. SNG Levante no. 1682; BMC no. 18). – Rev.: Nike standing left, holding palm branch wreath. Legend right AIΓEAIΩN, field left monogram. Bronze coins of Aigeai/Kilikia between c. 164 bc and the beginning of the imperial period. Ref.: BMC Lycaonia, Isauria, and Cilicia p. 22 nos. 18–19 pl. 4. 4; Levante (1971) pp. 94–102 nos. 11–32, 34–59 pl. 17–18; SNG Levante nos. 1681–1682 (= SNG Aulock no. 5443 pl. 181), 1683–1685 pl. 113; SNG Cilicie no. 2315 pl. 128; SNG PPS no. 53 pl. 3; H. Bloesch, Hellenistic coins of

78

NOTES

138 139

140 141

142 143 144

145 146 147

148

149

150

Aigeai (Kilikia), ANS Museum Notes 27, 1982, pp. 53–96, esp. pp. 69–70, 88–89 nos. 233–250 pl. 21–22; SNG Copenhagen Supplement. Recent acquisitions 1941–1996 (2002) no. 547 pl. 25; F. Imhoof-Blumer, Kleinasiatische Münzen II. A. Hölder (Vienna 1902) pp. 424–425 nos. 3–7 pl. 16. 8–10; M.I. Rostovtzeff, Le Gad de Doura et Seleucus Nicator in: Mélanges syriens offerts à R. Dussaud. I.P. Geuthner (Paris 1939) p. 287; Leschhorn (1984) p. 236 n. 1. Ziegler (1998) p. 685. One with vivid locks, the other with a much more static hair structure accompanied by a less elaborated face with a heavy chin as opposed to a more individualised one with a smaller jaw-section and equivalent lower face in the first variant. See e.g. SNG Levante nos. 1681–1683 contra nos. 1684–1685. F. Imhoof-Blumer, Kleinasiatische Münzen II. A. Hölder (Vienna 1902) p. 430 already favoured Alexander, but see references above for different views. Obv.: Diademed and draped bust of Alexander right. – Rev.: Head of C. Iulius Caesar right. AIΓEAIΩN THΣ IEPAΣ KAI AVTONOMOV. In field MI ZΠ or ZΠ (in ligature). Bronze coins of Aigeai/Kilikia from ad 40/41 (= year 87 of local era). Ref.: RPC I no. 4036 pl. 152; RPC I Suppl. no. 4036/4; SNG Switzerland I nos. 1691–1692 pl. 114; SNG Switzerland I. Levante – Cilicia Supplement 1 (Zurich 1993) no. 400 pl. 33; SNG PPS no. 55 pl. 3; Ziegler (1998) p. 685 and n. 35. Clearly visible with SNG Levante nos. 1691–1692 pl. 114. See again SNG Levante no. 1692 pl. 114. The variety in the degree of stressing various of these characteristics shows once again the relative freedom of the craftsman engaged in the production of dies. This provides us also with an argument against interpretations of this portrait as one of Augustus, as imperial portraits tend to be much more standardised: see C. Arnold-Biucchi, ANS Annual report 1997, p. 19. Compare also SNG PPS no. 55. R. Ziegler, Städtisches Prestige und kaiserliche Politik. Schwann (Düsseldorf 1985) p. 17. RPC I p. 593 remains doubtful. On this Pharsalian era see W. Leschhorn, Antike Ären. Historia Einzelschriften 81. Franz Steiner Verlag (Stuttgart 1993) pp. 221–225, esp. 225 n. 32. Obv.: Draped laureate bust of Hadrian right. AVTOKP KAIC TPAIANOC A∆PIANOC CEB. – Rev.: Diademed head of Alexander right, goat below to left. AIΓEAIΩN – ETOVC ∆ΞP. Tetradrachms (billon) of Aigeai/Kilikia of ad 117/118 (= year 164). Ref.: SNG Cilicie no. 2326 pl. 129; SNG Copenhagen no. 35 pl. 2; Prieur (2000) p. 85 nos. 715–715 a (Perseus, no. 715 a, tridrachm?); C.J. Howgego in: CIRP p. 6 pl. 1.2.20. Obv.: Opposing busts of Macrinus, laureate, left, and Diadumenian, with bare head, right. AVT K M OΠ CEV MAKPINOC KAI[. . .], below busts [. . .]NIAN. – Rev.: Diademed bust of Alexander right. MAKPINOVΠ M EVΓ Π[. . .]ΩN[. . .], in left field ∆ΞC. Bronze coins of Aigeai/Kilikia from ad 217/218 (= year 264). SNG Cilicie no. 2347 pl. 131. Obv.: Draped and armoured bust of Diadumenian right. M OΠ ANTΩNEINOC KAICAP. – Rev.: Diademed head of Alexander with long hair right. MAKPEINOVΠOΛE AIΓAI MA EVΓ ΠI ΘE, in left field Γ, in right field ΞC. Bronze coins of Aigeai/Kilikia from ad 217 (= year 263). Ref.: SNG Cilicie no. 2348 pl. 131; Ziegler (1998) p. 685 n. 35. – Obv.: Ditto. – Rev.: Ditto, below goat. MAKPEINOVΠ AIΓEΩN M EVΓ Π Θ ∆ΞC. From ad 217/218 (= year 264). Ref.: BMC Lycaonia, Isauria, and Cilicia p. 25 no. 29 pl. 4.10; SNG Levante no. 1752 pl. 118; Ziegler (1998) p. 685 n. 35. Possibly with the specimen SNG Levante no. 1752 pl. 118.

79

NOTES

151 Which seemingly takes the role of an indicator of Alexander’s identity: Ziegler (1998) p. 686. 152 Obv.: Ditto. M OΠE ANTΩNEINOC KAI (SNG Fitzwilliam: . . . ANTΩNINOC KAICE), (Berlin: . . . ANTΩNEINOC KAICAP). – Rev.: Head of Herakles (Alexander) with scalp of lion right. MAKPINOVΠ M EVΓ ΠI ΘE AIΓEΩN ∆ΞC (SNG Levante; Ziegler (1989)) or Π Θ AIΓEΩN ∆ΞC (SNG Cilicie) or MAKPEINOVΠ AIΓEΩN M EVΓ Π [Θ?], at bottom ∆ΞC (SNG Fitzwilliam) or OVΠ AIΓEΩN M EV (Berlin). From ad 217/218 (= year 264). Ref.: SNG Levante no. 1750 pl. 118 = SNG Aulock no. 5455 pl. 182 = CNG 66, Auction 19 May 2004, lot 1100; SNG Cilicie nos. 2349–2350 pl. 131; Ziegler (1989) p. 174 no. 1388 pl. 70; SNG Fitzwilliam Museum IV Part VII Asia Minor: Lycia – Cappadocia (London 1967) no. 5225 pl. 107. 153 Obv.: Draped, laureate and armoured bust of Macrinus right. [AVT K M OΠ] CEV MAKPINOC. On right countermark (Nike?). – Rev.: Beardless armoured horseman (Alexander?) with coat with spear right. MAKPINOΠO M EVΓ Π Θ, at bottom AIΓEΩN / ∆ΞC. From ad 217/218 (= year 264). Ref.: SNG Levante no. 1747 pl. 118 (Alexander on Boukephalos). – Similar scene (SNG Cilicie no. 2345 pl. 131), horseman now bearded spearing lion certainly representing the emperor. 154 Obv.: Draped bust of Supera, wife of Aemilianus, on lunula right. ΓAI KOPNH COVΠEPA CEB. – Rev.: Diademed head of Alexander. AIΓEAIΩN NEΩK NAVAP [. . .]. From ad 253/254. Ref.: SNG Levante no. 1791 pl. 121. 155 Obv.: Draped, armoured and laureate bust of Aemilian right. AVT AIMIΛIO – C AIMIΛIANOC CEB. – Rev.: Alexander with coat around hip seen from the front. In left hand spear (point downwards). In right hand holding a bowl above a bull, in background city gate. AIΓEAIΩN N-EΩKO. In left field NAV – APX – IC. Beside Alexander’s head on left a three-digit year numeral. From ad 253/254 (= year 299). Ref.: SNG Levante no. 1788 pl. 120; SNG Cilicie no. 2380 pl. 133; CNG Auction 57, 4 April 2001, lot 826; Ziegler (1998) p. 682. 156 There is no written evidence from ancient literature or epigraphy for any relationship between these two cities and Alexander, be it historical or fiction. 157 Obv.: Veiled head of Tyche right, branch in front. – Rev.: Draped and diademed bust (of Alexander?) right. IEPO–ΠOΛEITΩN. Bronze coins of Hierapdis (Kastabala)/Kilikia of the first century ad (?). Ref.: RPC I no. 4064 pl. 153 (Alexander?); F. Imhoof-Blumer, Kleinasiatische Münzen II. A. Hölder (Vienna 1902) p. 447 no. 1 pl. 18. 7 (‘unbärtiger Kopf’). 158 In this region and time the only other alternative. For Seleukid founders see Leschhorn (1991) pp. 445–446; Leschhorn (1984) pp. 232–246. – For provincial coinages of the imperial period a type from Abila in the Dekapolis of ad 218/ 219 with Elagabalus on obverse and Seleukos I on reverse, and also the homonoia coin from Abila and Kapitolas see the section on the Roman Dekapolis below. 159 Obv.: Draped, armoured and diademed bust of Alexander (?) right. – Rev.: Veiled bust of Tyche right, torch in front. IEPOΠO–ΛITΩN. Mid-second century ad/ Antonine period: RPC I no. 4065 pl. 153 (first century ad? Alexander?); SNG Levante no. 1577 pl. 106 (second to first century bc, king or hero); SNG Cilicie nos. 2226–2227 pl. 123 (ditto, king?); SNG PPS no. 551 pl. 33 (king?); SNG Leypold II no. 2364 (Alexander?, incorrect no. in plate section). 160 SNG Levante no. 1577 pl. 106. 161 Obv.: Diademed head or bust of Alexander (?) right. – Rev.: Standing figure of Tyche with cornucopia and rudder left. On right EΠIΦANEΩN, in left field ANP. Bronze coin of Epiphania/Kilikia from ad 83/84 (= year 151 of local era).

80

NOTES

162 163

164

165

166 167

Ref.: RPC II no. 1787 pl. 82 (Alexander?); SNG Levante no. 1812 pl. 122 (Alexander rather than Antiochos IV, wrong date); SNG Cilicie no. 2394 pl. 134 (ditto). Obv.: Laureate head of Marcus Aurelius (?) right. Legend illegible. – Rev.: Diademed head of Alexander right. AΛEΞAN∆PON NIKAIEIC. Bronze coins of Nikaia/Bithynia from ad 161–181 (?). Ref.: Recueil I 3 no. 191 pl. 71.21. Obv.: Bust of bearded emperor right. [. . .][KOMO?]∆OC [A]NTΩN[. . .]. – Rev.: Diademed head of Alexander left. AΛEΞAN∆PON NIKAIEIC. Under M. Aurelius or Commodus. Ref.: Recueil I 3 no. 288 (1) pl. 74.26. – The following specimens all from ad 181–192: Obv.: Laureate head of Commodus right. AV K KOMO∆OC – ANTΩNIN. – Rev.: Ditto, but right. AΛEΞAN∆ –P–ON NIKAIEIC. Ref.: BMC Pontus, Paphlagonia, and Bithynia p. 159 no. 47; Recueil I 3 no. 287 pl. 74.25. – Obv.: Armoured bust of Commodus right. AV K M AVPH KOM ANT. – Rev.: Ditto, right. NIKAIEΩN. Ref.: Recueil I 3 no. 289 pl. 74.27. Obv.-legend possibly recut. – Obv.: Armoured bust right. Legend illegible. – Rev.: Ditto, right. AΛ–EIA–N–∆PON NIKAIEIC. Ref.: Unpublished (Oxford, Herberden Coin Room). – Obv.: Laureate head of Commodus right. AVT K M AVPH KOM ANTΩN. – Rev.: Ditto, right, but head tilted upwards. AΛEΞAN∆PO[. . .] NIKAIEIC. Ref.: E.J. Waddell New York, Auction 1, 9 December 1982, lot. 109 pl. 7. – Obv.: (Armoured?) bust of Commodus right. M A KOM ANTΩN[IN]OC. – Rev.: Ditto, right, head not tilted, but Alexander’s hair moves more. NIKAI–E–ΩN. Ref.: Recueil I 3 no. 290 pl. 74.28. – Obv.: Laureate head of Commodus right. [. . .] KOMO∆OC. – Rev.: (Conventional) diademed head of Alexander left. AΛEΞAN∆[PON NIKAIEIC?]. Ref.: Recueil I 3 no. 288 (2). Obv.: Laureate head of Commodus right. AVT KOMO∆ – ANTΩNIN (specimen Oxford . . . KOMO∆O – ANTΩNINO). – Rev.: Alexander, naked, standing, seen from the front with spear (point upwards) in left hand. Whole figure on base line. Right hand touches hip and holds object (more probably a thunderbolt than a sword). Figure rests on right leg, left is relaxed. Head turning to left of figure and slightly turned upwards. AΛEΞAN∆PON – NIKAIEIC. From ad 181–184. Ref.: Recueil I 3 no. 291 pl. 74.29; L. Forrer, The Weber Collection III 2. Spink (London 1929) no. 7498 pl. 269 [erroneously attributed to Alexandria kat’Isson = Levante (1971) p. 100 no. 84 pl. 20 (ditto)]. – Obv.: Draped, armoured and laureate bust of Commodus right. AV KOM – ANTΩN[. . .]. – Rev.: Ditto. AΛEΞAN∆P[ON] – NIKAIEIC. From c. ad 182–184 (because of style of imperial portrait). Ref.: Recueil I 3 no. 292; F. Imhoof-Blumer, Kleinasiatische Münzen. I.A. Hölder (Vienna 1901) p. 9 no. 3 pl. 1.12; Schreiber (1903) pp. 186–187 fig. 23; O. von Vacano, Typenkatalog der antiken Münzen Kleinasiens. Dietrich Reimer Verlag (Berlin 1986) p. 335 (holding sword and spear). A number of reverses actually name the king in the legend using a rare formula in the accusative case. – Recueil I 3 no. 124 pl. 69.24 of M. Aurelius as Caesar has a reverse with the head of Herakles. There is no reason to identify this head as a portrait of Alexander because Herakles is well attested as (one) founding hero of Nikaia. See note below. Compare also Recueil I 3 no. 56–58, 108. Herakles reverses never bear any legend referring to Alexander. This reading follows LAGM p. 36. Obv.: Draped, armoured and radiate bust of Severus Alexander right. M AVP CEH A–ΛΞAN∆POC (sic) AVΓ. – Rev.: Head of Alexander with long hair on neck and broad diadem right, head tilted upwards. NI–KAIEΩN. From ad 222–235. Ref.: SNG Aulock no. 627 pl. 19; Vermeule (1986) p. 21.

81

NOTES

168 Compare AMNG III 1 nos. 359. 1, 502. 1 and the British Museum specimen Inv.-no. 1958–3–4–68 of type AMNG III 1 no. 508. 169 Recueil I 3 p. 396 n. 6. 170 The silver Poros-Dekadrachms and Ptolemy’s staters with Alexander riding in a quadriga of elephants. Compare the bronze statuette Stewart (1993) pp. 208–209 fig. 70 and the gems p. 436, if representing Alexander. 171 Schreiber (1903) pp. 186–187. 172 Stewart (1993) T 120 and T 134 = Plut. De Iside et Osiride 24 (Moralia 360D); Plut. De Alexandri Magni fortuna aut virtute 2.3.1 (Mor. 335F). 173 Smith (1988) p. 62; Stewart (1993) pp. 161–162. 174 Compare the statue of Alexander Aniketos Theos (‘the invincible god’) in Athens: Stewart (1993) pp. 100, 207–208, 381–382 T 92 = Hypereides, Kata Demosthenous frag. 7.31–32. 175 Stoneman (2004) pp. 27–41 and map 2. 176 See RE XVII (1937) cols. 228–229 s. v. Nikaia 7) (W. Ruge); Strubbe (1984– 1986) p. 273. The city was actually founded by Antigonos the One-eyed, renamed by Lysimachos in honour of his wife Nikaia. On the alleged descent from Greeks and Macedonians compare also: Dion Chrysostomos Or. 39.2. See Leschhorn (1984) p. 218 n. 4 and p. 255; Strubbe (1984–1986) p. 266 n. 77 and p. 286; M. Janke, Historische Untersuchungen zu Memnon von Herakleia. (Würzburg 1963) pp. 94–96. – Recueil I 3 no. 225 pl. 72.23 shows a founder in arms boarding a ship (legend NIKAIEΩN KTICTHC). The main founder figures related to in Nikaia, however are the gods Dionysos and Herakles. See in addition to Recueil I 3 p. 396 for the first ibid. no. 78 pl. 68.12; no. 80 pl. 78.14; no. 269 pl. 74.7; no. 836 pl. 87.30; no. 837 pl. 87.31; for the latter ibid. no. 161 pl. 70. 26; no. 162 pl. 70. 27; no. 159 pl. 70.24. Also an eponymous nymph, replacing the wife of Lysimachos after whom the city was named first, plays some role on coins of Nikaia; compare Strubbe (1984–1986) pp. 269, 272, 286 n. 199; Weiß (1996) p. 165 and n. 26. 177 Neither M. Aurelius nor Commodus ever visited Nikaia. 178 Soateros, a native of Nikomedia and the emperor’s favourite, lost his position in ad 182: Dio Cassius 73.12.2. See F. von Saldern, Studien zur Politik des Commodus. Verlag Marie Reidorf (Rahden/Westfalen 2003) pp. 279–280; Burrell (2004) p. 153. – Ibid. p. 154 n. 53; Saldern (op. cit.) p. 280 n. 119 on the privileges gained by Nikaia in consequence. 179 On these in general and in the case of Commodus and Nikaia see J. Nollé, Ετυχ το κυροι. Feliciter dominis. Akklamationsmünzen des griechischen Ostens unter Septimius Severus und städtische Mentalitäten, Chiron 28, 1998, pp. 323–354 esp. pp. 345–346 fig. 9 = Recueil I 3 no. 321 pl. 75. 20. – Nikaia would later lose its privileges again after taking the wrong side in the civil war between Pescennius Niger and Septimius Severus. 180 The new citizens were forced into Antigoneia by a synoikismos of nearby Neandria and other settlements. See Weiß (1996) p. 162; Bellinger (1961) pp. 2–3, 12, 78–79; Billows (1990) pp. 298, 305, 323. Roman colony: D. Magie, Roman rule in Asia Minor. Princeton University Press (Princeton, New Jersey 1950) pp. 472, 1334. 181 Compare e.g. the case of Smyrna (plate 15). 182 On this tradition, solely focusing on Apollon, see Weiß (1996) pp. 165–171, highlighting the help of the god against a plague of mice, and a shepherd discovering the cult statue of the god. Both scenes are also represented on civic coins. As our sources are as late as the second (coins) and third centuries ad

82

NOTES

183 184

185 186

187 188 189

190 191 192

193

(literary), there is no definite proof for traditions in the Hellenistic period, although these certainly existed. On Menander Rhetor see Weiß (1996) p. 162; D.A. Russell and N.G. Wilson (eds/transls), Menander Rhetor. Oxford University Press (Oxford 1981) esp. pp. xi–xl. There are too many variants in the combinations with different obverse representations and legends to give individual references. The uniform appearance of the reverse scenes, however, allows a more general overview. This reverse [Bellinger (1961) type 10 in his catalogue (misunderstood as emperor)] in use from c. ad 160–253. Some coins (of several reverse types) carry the additional title of Alexandria: see Bellinger (1961) p. 107. Compare overview in Weiß (1996) p. 158 fig. 5–6. In use from c. ad 160–260. See Bellinger type 12 with eagle, type 11 without (misunderstood as emperor). Compare overview in Weiß (1996) p. 158 fig. 3–4. Menander Rhetor, Treatise 2.444.2–17. Compare ibid. 388.6–12; 426.7–24; 428.7–24; 428.30–429.4. There is no doubt that Alexander is depicted, and not a local hero or the emperor himself. The Alexander figure remains beardless through all issues over several decades. Weiß (1996) p. 162 and fig. 10–11. The latter detail also used as a reverse image of its own: ibid. fig. 1–2. Weiß (1996) p. 171. The first is not in use in this city anyway. The scene of a hero landing ashore on some coins of Abydos under Commodus as Caesar, Septimius Severus and Caracalla Caesar, Severus Alexander and Maximinus Thrax has been identified by some as Alexander crossing the Hellespont into Asia: I. Vecchi, Alexander the Great at Troy, Minerva 12, no. 4 July/August 2001, p. 56; CNG Auction New York, 15–16 January 2002 = Triton V p. 139 lot 1716; Gorny & Mosch Auction 146, 6 March 2006, p. 69 lot 360. – It would certainly represent a fascinating example of a Greek city commemorating a famous event in history, but the iconographical scheme would also fit a founder’s figure. Unfortunately we do not know any details of the legend of the hero Abydos. See B. Imhoof-Blumer, Beiträge zur Erklärung griechischer Münztypen. I. Seefahrende Heroen, Nomisma 5, 1910, pp. 25, 29–31 nos. 22–25 pl. 2.19–20; M.J. Price and B. Trell, Greek coins and their cities. Friary Press (London 1977) pp. 221, 258 no. 315 fig. 486. – Compare Iustin. 2.5.4–10. On the city see Leschhorn (1984) pp. 217–218; Klose (1987) pp. 3–5. These founders named by Aelius Aristides, oration 21.3–4. The first city was destroyed by the Lydian king Alyattes around 600 bc. Strabo 14.1.37; Aelius Aristides, oration 20.5; 19.4. Obv.: Head of Marcus Aurelius with short beard right [Klose (1987) p. 258 no. 13] or left (all the other pieces). AVPHΛIOC – KAICAP. – Rev.: The dream of Alexander as founder of the New Symrna, the king sleeps under a plane tree, and his head is resting on a round shield, beside it lies a bull’s head. Left the two Nemeseis wearing chitons, one holding a cubit rule, the other a bridle (their usual attributes). ΘEV∆IANOC CTPAT ANEΘHKE CMVPNAIOIC or . . . CMVP–NAIOIC [Klose (1987) no. 12]. Bronze coins of Smyrna/Ionia issued by the Strategos (magistrate) Theudianos shortly after ad 147. Ref.: Klose (1987) pp. 29, 36.257–258 nos. 1–13 pl. 39–40; SNG Aulock no. 8002 pl. 277 [= Klose (1987) no. 10]; BMC Ionia p. 279 no. 346 [= Klose (1987) no. 6]; Stewart (1993) pp. 307–309 fig. 109 (suggests the existence of a statue group from the Hellenistic period). – Chronology: Klose (1987) p. 69. Obv.: Draped, armoured and laureate bust of Gordianus III right. AV KAI M ANT ΓOP∆IANOC. – Rev.: Ditto, but a sword next to Alexander’s left hand.

83

NOTES

194

195

196

197 198 199

200 201

202 203

CMVPNAIΩN Γ NEΩ EΠ TEPTION, in exergue ACIAPXOV. Issued by the Asiarchos (magistrate) M. Aurelius Tertius between ad 242–244. Ref.: Klose (1987) p. 308 no. 15 pl. 52 V 6 and 53 R 14; BMC Ionia p. 294 no. 442 [= Klose (1987) no. 15/5]. Obv.: Draped, armoured and laureate bust of Philip the Arab right. AV K M IOV – ΦIΛIΠΠOC. – Rev.: Ditto. CMVPNAIΩN Γ NEΩ EΠ C AΦ EΠI, in exergue KTHTOV. Issued by the Strategos Aph. . . Epiktetos between ad 244– 249. Ref.: Klose (1987) p. 313 no. 1 pl. 54 R 1 V 1; SNG Aulock no. 2231 pl. 69 [=Klose (1987) no. 1/1]; BMC Ionia p. 296 no. 452 pl. 29.16 [= Klose (1987) no. 1/3]; Vermeule (1986) p. 26. Identified as a bukranion by Klose (1987) pp. 257, 308, 313. Whether it is a skull (bukranion) or a head (bukephalion) needs further clarification. Stewart (1993) pp. 208–209 rightly relates the bull’s head to the sacrifice a founder would perform, but I doubt any particular connections to Alexander’s sacrifice in Alexandria in Egypt. See Klose (1987) pp. 28–30 on this particular characteristic twinning of the goddess in Smyrna. Their cult was already established by early Greek colonists in the Archaic period. The two figures of Nemesis do not mirror the old and the new city of Smyrna. Klose (1987) p. 29. – Quoting in n. 174 H. Brunn in: Kleine Schriften II (Leipzig 1906) p. 197, who suggests that this scene as a whole may derive from a statue group erected in Symrna. Stewart (1993) p. 308. Compare LIMC III (1986) pp. 1050–1070, esp. 1057– 1065 nos. 52–154 s.v. Ariadne (M.-L. Bernard). This issue being a direct consequence of this catastrophe wrongly suggested by S.R.F. Price in: CIRP p. 120 quoting Aelius Aristides, oration 19.4; 20.5. Compare the translation by Chr. A. Behr, P. Aelius Aristides. The complete works II. Brill (Leiden 1981) pp. 358–359 with n. 1 on the date ad 177, which is obviously too late. Earlier earthquakes in ad 165 are mentioned ibid. p. 360 n. 18, but these did not take place in Smyrna and again are too late for this first issue. Klose (1987) p. 36. See F. Millar, The Roman Near East 31 bc – ad 337. Harvard University Press (Cambridge, Mass./London 1993); M. Sartre, The Middle East under Rome. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press (Cambridge, Mass. 2005) [English translation by C. Porter and E. Rawlings of French original ‘D’Alexandre à Zénobie’]. On the boundaries of the Dekapolis: Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 6–8; Butcher (2003) p. 113. Although the Dekapolis lost its function as an administrative unit after the creation of the Roman province of Arabia in ad 106, its inhabitants maintained a common identity. In this sense the term is used also for the second and third centuries ad. Lichtenberger (2003) p. 315 with ancient sources. Obv.: Bust or head of Commodus with laurel wreath right. AVT K M AV–P KOMO∆OC. – Rev.: Bust of a bearded Alexander in a highly decorated cloak right, short, curly hair and oblong facial features. KAΠI AΛE–ΞA MAKE ΓENAP (and variants). Left field Γ, right Ч. Year 93 of local era: Spijkerman (1978) p. 102 no. 15 pl. 20; L. Robert, Antiquités syriennes, Syria 36, 1959, pp. 66, 76 no. 9 pl. 12; SNG ANS 6. Palestine – South Arabia (Wetteren 1981) no. 1274 pl. 43; Leschhorn (1984) p. 219; Leschhorn (1991) p. 448 pl. 4.1; J. Meshorer, City coins of Eretz-Israel and the Dekapolis in the Roman period. The Israel Museum Jerusalem (Jerusalem 1985) p. 86 no. 232; Kellner (1970) pp. 1–2 no. 5 fig. 5 a-b; Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 122–123, 449 MZ 62 pl. 18.

84

NOTES

204 The city’s era commences in the autumn of either ad 97 or 98, and hence the year 93 indicates ad 189/190 or 190/191. See Lichtenberger (2003) p. 115 n. 943 with references. General remarks on eras in this region: Butcher (2003) pp. 122–123. 205 Leschhorn (1984) pp. 219–220; Kellner (1970) p. 3; Lichtenberger (2003) p. 122. 206 Lichtenberger (2003) p. 123. 207 Only the light beard of Alexander, recognised by Kellner (1970) p. 3 and Lichtenberger (2003) p. 122, is remarkable. 208 Mainly through the enormous eyes and an identical design of beard and hair. On this phenomenon compare Lichtenberger (2003) p. 122. 209 Kellner (1970) p. 3 referring to Neuffer (1929) pp. 35–38. – Compare Lichtenberger (2003) p. 123; C. Augé in: International meeting of history and archaeology. Delphi 1986 (Athens 1991) p. 172; A. Alföldi, Die monarchische Repräsentation im römischen Kaiserreiche. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft (Darmstadt 1970) pp. 16, 22–23. 210 See Stewart (1993) pp. 91–92 and n. 74. The chiton of the Persian king was indeed also worn by Alexander, but he refused to appear dressed in oriental trousers, coat and tiara: ibid. pp. 352–353 T 34–35, 37. See also T 36, 46 with doubtful and contradictory reports. 211 E.g. Vologazes IV (reigned ad 147–191): BMC Parthia pp. 237–239 nos. 1–31 pl. 35.7–13; F.B. Shore, Parthian coins and history. Classical Numismatic Group (Quarryville, Penn. 1993) pp. 156–157 nos. 427–432 with ill. – Parthian costume: V.S. Curtis in: J. Wiesehöfer (ed.), Das Partherreich und seine Zeugnisse. Historia Einzelschriften 122. Franz Steiner Verlag (Stuttgart 1998) p. 62. See also J. Wiesehöfer in: J.E. Curtis (ed.), Mesopotamia and Iran in the Parthian and Sasanian periods. British Museum Press (London 2000) pp. 23–26. See Curtis ibid. p. 64 on the role of Palmyra as an access road for cultural traditions into the Roman territory. 212 Lichtenberger (2003) p. 123; Augé in: International meeting (note 209), p. 172. 213 Compare LAGM p. 78. Title: See Leschhorn (1984) p. 219 n. 5. 214 Obv.: Draped armoured bust of Geta right. Π CEΠ – ΓETAC K. – Rev.: Bust of Alexander right. KAΠI A A – I MAK ΓE [Kapitolieon Asylos Autonomos Hiera Makedon Genarches. Compare Leschhorn (1984) p. 220]. In left field H, right P. More details are not recognisable, but the identical bust seems to indicate a restoration of the reverse-type inaugurated under Commodus. Year 108 of local era. Ref.: Spijkerman (1978) p. 104 no. 20 pl. 20; Leschhorn (1984) pp. 219–220; Lichtenberger (2003) p. 122 with n. 1003. 215 Obv.: Draped armoured bust of Geta to the right. Π CEΠT ΓE–TAC KAI–C. Rev.: Alexander, diademed, standing left and Seleukos right, both in armour, each holding a spear and shaking hands. In exergue AΛE, from left IAN∆POC – CEΛEY, again in exergue KOC. Only three coins are known: F. Sternberg Zurich Auction 25–26 Nov. 1976, lot. 499 pl. 20; Leschhorn (1984) p. 220; Weiß (1996) p. 162 n. 18 fig. 14; A.G. van der Dussen Maastricht, Auction 24, 1–2 June 1995, lot 3640 pl. 17; Leschhorn (1991) pp. 448–449 pl. 4.3; Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 73, 315–316, 445 MZ 28 pl. 15. 216 This rare case of naming Alexander is known from coins of the Koinon Makedonon, the cities of Apollonia Mordiaion, Nike: Sagalassos, Gerasa and Kapitolias, the medallions from Aboukir and late Roman contorniates. 217 Leschhorn (1984) p. 220. 218 Lichtenberger (2003) p. 73 with n. 480. 219 A contemporary tradition which replaced the historical founder Seleukos IV

85

NOTES

220 221

222

223

224

225 226 227 228

229 230 231

(reigned 187–175 bc) with the more famous Seleukos I (died 280 bc) for reasons of prestige: Leschhorn (1984) p. 220; Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 72–73, 316. Lichtenberger (2003) p. 73. – For the geographical situation see Butcher (2003) pp. 111–113 fig. 33. Such homonoia coins with Alexander are also known from Ephesos with Alexandria in Egypt [P.-R. Franke – M.K. Nollé, Die Homonoia-Münzen Kleinasiens und der thrakischen Randgebiete I. Saarbrücker Studien zur Archäologie und Alten Geschichte 10 (Saarbrücken 1997) p. 57 nos. 544–545 pl. 26.53; M.K. Nollé, Die Eintracht zweier Metropolen: Überlegungen zur Homonoia von Ephesos und Alexandria zu Beginn der Regierung Gordians III., Jahrbuch für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte 46, 1996, pp. 49–72] and from coins issued by the Makedonian Koinon and the city of Beroia. Obv.: Draped, laureate and armoured bust of Septimius Severus right. AVT KAI Λ CEΠ – CEOV ΠEP CEB. – Rev.: Diademed head of Alexander right. AΛEΞ MAK KTI – ΓEPACΩN. ad 193–211. Ref.: Spijkerman (1978) p. 164 no. 29 pl. 34; J. Meshorer, City coins of Eretz-Israel and the Decapolis in the Roman period. The Israel Museum Jerusalem (Jerusalem 1985) p. 94 no. 256 with ill.; Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 200, 220. 454 MZ 115 pl. 21. Obv.: Draped, laureate and armoured bust of Caracalla right. AVT KAI M AVP – ANTΩNEINOC. – Rev.: Head of Alexander with diadem to the right. AΛEΞ MAK KTI – ΓEPACWN (and variants). ad 211–217 (?). Ref.: Spijkerman (1978) p. 164 no. 31 pl. 34; H. Seyrig, Antiquités syriennes, Syria 42, 1965, pp. 25 (obv. Elagabalus, rev. Alexander); Stewart (1993) p. 309–310 fig. 111 (Elagabalus). Obv.: Draped, laureate and armoured bust of Elagabalus right. AVTO KAICAP ANTΩNINOC (and variants. – Rev.: Diademed head of Alexander right, remarkable anastolé (not a horn). AΛEΞAN∆POC MAKE∆ΩN. ad 218–222. Ref.: N. Vismara, Monetazione provinziale romana II. Collezione Winsemann Falghera 3. Septimius Severus – Severus Alexander. Edizioni Ennerre (Milan 1992) p. 754 no. 1838 pl. 186 (Alexander with horn); Spijkerman (1978) pp. 166–167 nos. 34–35 pl. 35; Lichtenberger (2003) p. 200 with n. 1764 (Alexander with ‘horn’). In popular legend the city’s name is derived from the fact that old men (gerontes), veterans of Alexander’s army, established a colony at this place. See Stewart (1993) p. 309 with n. 56. With special regard to the roundness and small size of the head and the hair. Compare Lichtenberger (2003) p. 200. L. Verus of ad 161–169: Spijkerman (1978) p. 160 no. 16 pl. 33 (togatus); Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 220, 453 MZ 112 pl. 21 (Alexander?). – M. Aurelius: Spijkerman (1978) p. 160 no. 9. pl. 33; Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 220, 453 MZ 111 pl. 21 (Alexander?). – Pl. 33 of Spijkerman (1978) no. 9 wrongly shows a coin of type no. 10. – M. Aurelius of ad 161–180: Spijkerman (1978) p. 161 no. 10 pl. 33; Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 220, 453 MZ 111 pl. 21 (Alexander?). – M. Aurelius of ad 177–180: Spijkerman (1978) p. 162 no. 21 pl. 34; SNG Switzerland II. Münzen der Antike. Sammlung J.-P. Righetti im Bernischen Historischen Museum (Berne 1993) no. 2535 pl. 171 (togatus). Pointing to the etymological legend of the foundation of Gerasa by Alexander’s veterans: Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 191–192. See above. Butcher (2003) p. 113. Seleukid foundations of the early second century bc: Lichtenberger (2003) p. 192; E. Schürer, The history of the Jewish people in the age of Jesus Christ. A new English edition. II Edinburgh (1979) pp. 149–155; Butcher (2003) pp. 27–28.

86

NOTES

232 Spijkerman (1978) pp. 49, 56–57 no. 30 pl. 9; Leschhorn (1984) p. 220; Leschhorn (1991) p. 449 pl. 4.3; Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 73, 445 MZ 27 pl. 15. Compare also another coin from Abila with a standing figure of a warrior from ad 201/202. Ref.: Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 72–73, 445 MZ 26 pl. 15; Spijkerman (1978) pp. 52–53 no. 17 pl. 8. 233 H. Seyrig, Antiquités syriennes, Syria 36, 1959, pp. 67, 76 no. 5 pl. 12. 234 Spijkerman (1978) pp. 49, 56–57 no. 30. 235 Leschhorn (1984) p. 220; Leschhorn (1991) p. 449; Lichtenberger (2003) p. 73. 236 Seleukos I as a founder: Leschhorn (1991) pp. 445–446; Leschhorn (1984) pp. 232–236; Butcher (2003) pp. 26, 100, 108, 113. See the homonoia coin attributed to Kapitolias and Abila (plate 18) above. 237 Leschhorn (1984) p. 218; Weiß (1992) p. 156. 238 Compare Rebuffat (1986) pp. 66, 70. Ibid. pp. 65–71 related to Caracalla’s visit in ad 202 and dated accordingly. – This modern perspective based on factual evidence, however, does not reflect the Greek appreciation of historical events and mythical traditions as a unit. 239 There are different reverses matching this Herakles/Alexander head: Obv.: Head of Herakles with lion’s scalp (Alexander Kistes) right. AΛEΞA KTIC AΠOΛΛΩNIATΩN. – Rev.: River god Hippophoras reclining left with reed, cornucopiae and vessel. IΠΠO[–?]ΦO–PAC (several variants). Bronze coins of Apollonia Mordiaion/Pisidia of c. ad 198–208. Ref.: BMC Lycia, Pamphilia, and Pisidia p. 202 no. 1 pl. 33. 1 (under Caracalla); SNG Copenhagen no. 95 pl. 4 (under Caracalla or Severus Alexander); SNG Aulock no. 4988 pl. 164 (under Caracalla); Aulock (1979) p. 54 nos. 34–53 pl. 1–2; Bieber (1964) p. 81 fig. 117 (under Elagabalus); Stewart (1993) pp. 309, 419 fig. 110; Rebuffat (1986) pp. 65–71 with fig. p. 66. – Obv.: Ditto. – Rev.: Apollonia and Lykia shaking hands. AΠOΛΛΩNIA–T – KAI ΛVKIΩN (or . . . – AT – . . . (BMC no. 10). In exergue OMONOIA. Ref.: BMC Lycia, Pamphilia, and Pisidia p. 204 nos. 9–10 pl. 33.5; SNG Aulock no. 4989 pl. 164; Aulock (1979) p. 54 nos. 24–33 pl. 1; Bieber (1964) p. 81 fig. 117; Vermeule (1986) p. 20 fig. 19 (c. ad 208– 210); Stewart (1993) pp. 309, 419 fig. 110. – Obv.: Ditto. AΛEΞAN∆POC KTICT AΠOΛΛΩNIA (∆P ligatured). – Rev.: Apollonia and Perge shaking hands, between them an altar, above tabula/image of Artemis Pergaia (?). AΠOΛΛΩNIATΩ ΠEPΓAIΩN, in exergue OMONOI/A. Ref.: S.W. Grose, Catalogue of the McClean Collection of Greek coins III. Cambridge University Press (Cambridge 1929) p. 272 no. 8973 pl. 321.8 (under Caracalla); Aulock (1979) p. 53 nos. 14–18 pl. 1. – Obv.: Ditto. – Rev.: Ditto, but Apollonia holds statuette of Apollo and Perge one of Artemis Ephesia. AΠOΛΛΩNIATΩN ΛY ΠEPΓAIΩN, in exergue OMONOI/A. Ref.: Aulock (1979) p. 53 nos. 19–20 pl. 1. – Obv.: Ditto. – Rev.: Apollonia and Ilion shaking hands, the former with statuette of Apollo, the latter with one of Athena. Between them an altar. AΠOΛΛΩNIATΩ ΛY K IΛIEΩN, in exergue OMONOIA. Ref.: Aulock (1979) p. 53 nos. 21–22 pl. 1. – Obv.: Ditto. AΛEΞAN∆OC (sic) KTIC AΠOΛΛΩNIAT. – Apollo with tripod right, holding a branch, at his foot a raven. AΠOΛΛΩ–NIATΩN ΛV. Ref.: SNG Aulock no. 4990 pl. 164; SNG Copenhagen no. 96 pl. 4; Aulock (1979) p. 53 nos. 9–13 pl. 1; Rebuffat (1986) pp. 65–71 fig. p. 65. 240 On the date see Aulock (1979) p. 52. 241 Rebuffat (1986) p. 69. Ibid. p. 70 n. 25 also stressing the appearance of Alexander’s name within this city’s elite as a possible reason for the use of this coin-type in Apollonia. If true this would add a particular local motivation, otherwise unknown.

87

NOTES

242 On these colourful stories see J.M. Blazquez, Alejandro Magna, modelo di Alejandro Severo in: J.M. Croisille (ed.), Neronia IV. Alejandro Magno, modelo de los emperadores romanos. Collection Latomus 209 (Brussels 1990) pp. 25–36 listing testimonies with a commentary. 243 J. Gagé, L’horoscope de Doura et le culte d’Alexandre sous les Sévères, Bulletin de la Faculté des Lettres de l’Université de Strasbourg 33, 1954, p. 165; Leschhorn (1984) pp. 220–221; Lichtenberger (2003) p. 59. – Compare J. Straub, Heidnische Geschichtsapologetik in der christlichen Spätantike. Antiquitas 4.1. R. Habelt (Bonn 1963) pp. 126–133; F. Taeger, Charisma. Studien zur Geschichte des antiken Herrscherkults I. Kohlhammer (Stuttgart 1959) pp. 221–222. 244 Obv.: Draped, armoured and laureate bust of Elagabalus right. IMP C M AV – ANTONINVS. – Rev.: Temple with four columns in front, in centre left Tyche standing, holding standard in her right hand, her left foot set on river god below. At her side Alexander (?), crowning Tyche with a wreath. COL CE–[S]APIA, in exergue AΛ[Φ] and figure of Silenos. Bronze coins of Caesarea ad Libanum/ Phoenicia from ad 219/220 (= year 531 of local era). Ref.: BMC Phoenicia p. 110 no. 8 pl. 13.9 (Alexander?); N. Vismara, Monetazione provinciale romana II. Collezione Winsemann Falghera III. Edizioni Ennerre (Milan 1992) p. 748 no. 1817 pl. 184 (Alexander?); Leschhorn (1991) p. 449 pl. 4.5 (Alexander?). – Obv.: Laureate head of Elagabalus right. IMP AV ANT (?). – Rev.: Ditto, but without Silenos, no legend, in exergue BΛΦ (year 532 = ad 220/221). Ref.: H.C. Lindgren, Ancient Greek bronze coins from the Lindgren Collection III. Chrysopylon Publishers (Quarryville, Penn. 1993) p. 76 no. 1399 pl. 76 (Alexander?). 245 Obv.: Draped bust of Severus Alexander as Caesar right. . . . CAP. – Rev.: Ditto, but legend COL . . ., in exergue ΓΛΦ (= year 533 = ad 221/222). Ref.: S. Heath, Acquisitions for 2002, American Journal of Numismatics 14, 2002, pp. 201–202 no. 9 pl. 31.9 (Alexander). 246 BMC Phoenicia p. 110 no. 9 pl. 13.10 and no. 10 for Severus Alexander as Caesar again show a similar figure next to Tyche, but flanked by two more unidentified figures. 247 Beroia and the Koinon: F. Papazoglou, Les villes de Macédoine à l’époque romaine. BCH Supplement 16. De Boccard (Paris 1988) pp. 141–148; F. Papazoglou, La province de Macédoine in: ANRW II 7. Walter de Gruyter. (Berlin/New York 1979) pp. 351–369; A.B. Tataki, Ancient Beroia. Prosopography and society. Meletemata 8. De Boccard (Athens 1988) pp. 447–448. 248 AMNG III 1 p. 22 dates the cessation of the Koinon’s coinage with the imperial portrait and the autonomous one (including Beroia itself) to ad 244 (year 275 of Actian era as numbered on reverses) and ad 246 (according to the date set by AMNG for the second Olympiad) respectively. As the majority of coins in question of Philip’s reign bear the date of year 275 this certainly indicates the termination of coin production in this period of ad 244–246. But note a new coin find with Philip’s portrait on the obverse, which lacks any reverse date: S. Kremydi-Sicilianou, The concealment of coins in times of crisis in: E. Kypraiou (ed.), XAPAKTHP. Papers in honour of M. Oikonomidou (Athens 1996) p. 132 no. 111 pl. 5 (in Greek, different obv. die from AMNG III 1 no. 321). Compare also AMNG III 1 no. 826 with notes for a few autonomous coins without dates. 249 The issues with imperial portraits are already decreasing in number under Septimius Severus (died ad 211). Hence this phenomenon is not caused by a consequent sudden favouring of Alexander, which takes place only at least seven years later under Elagabalus. It is not this scarcity of the emperor’s image, but instead the extraordinary rise in numbers of coins featuring Alexander that remains noteworthy.

88

NOTES

250 AMNG III 1 and 2 and earlier articles by H. Gaebler in Zeitschrift für Numismatik 24, 1904, pp. 245–338, esp. 290–338 and Gaebler (1906) pp. 1–38. For the privilege of being temple warden (neokoros), granting to a city the privilege of maintaining a temple for the imperial cult, see now Burrell (2004) pp. 1–6, 191–197. For chronology and era compare AMNG III 1 pp. 13–14. On the Actian era see W. Leschhorn, Antike Ären. Historia Einzelschriften 81. Franz Steiner Verlag (Stuttgart 1993) pp. 225–228, 425–428. 251 The exceptional number of types and combinations makes it impossible to list each of these single types, not to mention variants. The only full treatment of this subject is offered by AMNG III 1, which lists 550 numbers in its catalogue of pseudo-autonomous issues of the Koinon and Beroia respectively and nine combined with the emperor’s portrait. For an overview of types used and their combination of obv. and rev. and the distribution among reigns see the table provided by AMNG III 1 pp. 15–18 and pl. 3–5. Additions are published in AMNG III 2 pp. 11–18, 47–48. 252 Olympias reclining, Alexander sitting on a heap of arms, see below. 253 AMNG III 1 p. 15 assigning the letters A-K to these different portraits. 254 AMNG III 1 nos. 526–529a (nos. 526–528 obv. from same die). For an illustration see Gaebler (1906) p. 23 pl. 2.35 = AMNG III 1 no. 529.1. 255 AMNG III 1 pl. 4.14. 256 Gaebler (1906) pp. 23–24 stressing the fact that the assimilation of Alexander to Herakles was more favoured than the Lysimachos-type with ram’s horn. 257 AMNG III 1 nos. 760–764; Gaebler (1906) p. 23 pl. 2.36. 258 AMNG III 1 pl. 4.11. 259 AMNG III 1 pl. 4.12. 260 AMNG III 1 pl. 4.13. 261 AMNG III 1 pl. 4.15–17. 262 A group of two horsemen accompanied by Nike, wounded foe lying on the ground: AMNG III 1 no. 446, and one rider again with defeated enemy: AMNG III 1 nos. 767–778 and Lanz Munich Auction 109, 27 May 2002, lot 164 pl. 9. 263 Type F = AMNG III 1 nos. 405–407 (same obv. die) pl. 4.18; H = AMNG III 1 nos. 703–709, 808–813, 816, 817 pl. 4.19; K = AMNG III 1 nos. 837–840. – AMNG III 1 nos. 569.1 = SNG Copenhagen no. 1366 pl. 35 in contrast to AMNG also type K. – For slight corrections in the evolution of Alexander’s bust-type see K. Dahmen, The Alexander busts of the Macedonian Koinon – New evidence for sequence and chronology, The Numismatic Chronicle 2005, pp. 179–181. – AMNG III 1 no. 405 of type F preserves the very worn representation of a horse or horseman moving to the left on Alexander’s shield. AMNG III 1 no. 813 of type H equips Alexander with scale armour. 264 See AMNG III 1 pp. 15–18. Sometimes even the saddle cloth in shape of (presumably) a panther skin is indicated, confirming this identification: AMNG III 1 p. 19. For this attribute see Diod. 17.76.6 and Gaebler (1906) p. 28; H. Fuhrmann, Philoxenos von Eretria. Dieterichsche Universitäts-Buchdruckerei (Göttingen 1931) pp. 133–134; G. Calcani, Cavalieri di Bronzo. La torma di Alessandro opera di Lisippo. L’Erma di Bretschneider (Rome 1989) fig. 68, 85; A. Houghton and A. Stewart, The equestrian portrait of Alexander the Great on a new Tetradrachm of Seleucus I, Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau 78, 1999, pp. 28, 30–31. Compare also some gold medallions from Aboukir and Tarsos (plate 26). 265 AMNG III 1 pl. 5.4. With dog: AMNG III 1 no. 560; with serpent: AMNG III 1 nos. 349, 371–372, 559, 727, 768; SNG Copenhagen no. 1359 pl. 35 (= AMNG III 1 no. 371.1).

89

NOTES

266 Lion: AMNG III 1 nos. 370, 370a, 419, 420, 442b (nos. 442, 370 from same die), 558b, 643. – Foe: AMNG III 1 nos. 348, 418 (rev. from same die), 705, 723pl. 5.3; SNG Copenhagen no. 1363 pl. 35 (= AMNG III 1 no. 418). 267 There are a large number of variants, which switch the hands that carry his weapons or show him turning either to his left or right. Compare AMNG III 1 pl. 5.7; Gaebler (1906) p. 4 pl. 1.11, 15. 268 Suggested already by Ch. Patin, Imperatorum Romanorum numismata. S. Paulli (Strasbourg 1671) p. 14. Compare H. Gaebler, Zur Münzkunde Makedoniens IV., Zeitschrift für Numismatik 24, 1904, p. 322 and n. 3. On Charles Patin compare: C.E. Dekesel, Bibliotheca Nummaria II. Bibliography of 17th century numismatic books part III. Spink (London 2003) pp. 2084–2085. – Most recently Ziegler (2003) pp. 115–131, esp. pp. 121–122 pl. 14.2. 269 This interpretation based on an analysis of monuments (mostly coins depicting Roman emperors in this pose) from the Roman period: G. Hafner, Sieg und Frieden, Jahrbuch des Archäologischen Institutes 93, 1978, pp. 228–251, esp. pp. 237–238; Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 72–73. – Doryketos chora (spear won land): Hafner op. cit. p. 236; Stewart (1993) pp. 162, 167–168. 270 AMNG III 1 pl. 5.9. 271 AMNG III 1 pp. 20–21. 272 AMNG III 1 no. 393a; Gaebler (1906) p. 14 pl. 1.19. 273 AMNG III 1 no. 393. 274 For Boukephalos see R.P. Miller and K.R. Walters, Seleucid coinage and the legend of the horned Bucephalas, Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau 83, 2004, pp. 45–54; A.R. Anderson, Bucephalas and his legend, American Journal of Philology 51, 1930, pp. 1–21; D.J.A. Ross, A funny name for a horse – Bucephalus in Antiquity and Middle Ages in literature and visual art in: W.J. Aerts et al. (eds), Alexander the Great in the Middle Ages. Alfa (Nijmegen 1978) pp. 302–303; R. Winkes, Boucephalas in: R. Ross Hollowell (ed.), Miscellanea Mediterranea. Archaeologia Transatlantica XVIII. Brown University (Providence, Rhode Island 2000) pp. 101–107, esp. p. 103; Stoneman (2004) p. 17. 275 AMNG III 1 pl. 4.34. – This scene also reappears on a coin from Heliopolis in Roman Syria (plate 25). 276 The composition is similar to one with Bellerophon and Pegasos in Korinth under M. Aurelius: SNG Copenhagen no. 316 pl. 7. – Another as yet unidentified scene on a bronze coin from Ainos under Caracalla: F. Münzer and M.L. Strack, Die antiken Münzen von Thrakien. AMNG II 1. G. Reimer. (Berlin 1912) no. 406 pl. 5.31. Compare Antinoos leading a horse in Kyzikos: BMC Mysia p. 47 no. 214; SNG Mysie no. 653 pl. 32. – Castor, too, appears with a horse: H.A. Grueber, Roman medallions in the British Museum. The Trustees of the British Museum (London 1874) p. 14 no. 5 pl. 19.2, as does Herakles with one of the mounts of Diomedes in Nikaia under Caracalla: Recueil I 3 no. 451 pl. 78.32. 277 AMNG III 1 no. 302 pl. 3.24. – Another similar specimen is now kept in the Heberden Coin Room of the Ashmolean Museum (from David Winfieldon, 17.2.1960). 278 C. Jouanno, Alexandre et Olympias: de l’histoire au mythe, Bulletin de l’Association Guillaume Budé 1995, pp. 211–230; Stoneman (2004) pp. 15–16, 48; Nau (1968) p. 64 n. 91; Stoneman (1991) pp. 5–6, 8, 11–12; E. Baynham, Who put the ‘Romance’ in the Alexander Romance?: The Alexander Romances within the Alexander Historiography, Ancient History Bulletin 9, 1995, pp. 1–13. 279 AMNG III 1 pl. 4. 35. – Compare AMNG III 1 p. 20 pl. 4.26–27 for Olympias seated, feeding a snake.

90

NOTES

280 S. Kremydi-Sicilianou in: CIRP pp. 102–103 referring to the growing contemporary use of the identifier Macedonian. Pride in the past is also a motive found in the author Polyainos (K. Buraselis, Archaiognosia 8, 1993/1994, pp. 121–139, esp. pp. 122–123) and also Philostratos 2.557 (ibid. p. 122 n. 7): ‘our king’ Alexander III. The name Olympias is quite popular, too: A.B. Tataki, Macedonians abroad. Meletemata 26 (Athens 1998) pp. 209–210 nos. 17, 22; P.M. Fraser and E. Matthews (eds), A lexicon of Greek personal names IV. Oxford University Press (Oxford 2005) pp. 261–262. 281 On these games and especially their procedures, see Leschhorn (1998) pp. 403, 405 (gymnastic competitions and those between heralds). In ad 243/244 there were Agones involving horses, and inscriptions also mention events involving gladiators and hunting. Compare also the inscription (not Alexandreia) published by P.M. Nigdelis, Oberpriester und Gymnasiarchen im Provinziallandtag Makedoniens: eine neue Ehreninschrift aus Beroia, Klio 77, 1995, pp. 170–183, esp. p. 174. 282 See Burrell (2004) pp. 195–196; Leschhorn (1998) pp. 400–405. 283 AMNG III 1 p. 13, 22 no. 795–801, 856, 871. These accordingly took place every four years only. – This title was no longer part of the formula of an inscription of ad 252: G. Velenis in: Ancient Macedonia 6 (1999) pp. 1319–1320 no. 1. 284 Elagabalus as son of Caracalla: Herod. 5.3.10; 5.4.3; Dio Cassius 78.31.3; 78.32.2–3; SHA Carac. 9.2; Macr. 9.4; 14.2; 15.2; Elagab. 1.4; 2.1, 3; Dio Cassius 78.32.2–3. – A. Mastino, Le titolatura di Caracalla e Geta attraverso le iscrizioni (indici). Studi di storia antica 5. Clueb (Bologna 1981) p. 79. – For Severus Alexander: Herod. 3.7.3; Dio Cassius 79.19.4. – See J. Gagé, L’horoscope de Doura et le culte d’Alexandre sous les Sévères, Bulletin de la Faculté des Lettres de l’Université de Strasbourg 33, 1954, pp. 162–168. 285 Cities in Pisidia and Pamphylia were minting well into the reign of Tacitus (ad 275/276): Howgego (1995) p. 139; K. Butcher, Roman provincial coins: An introduction to the Greek Imperials. Seaby (London 1988) pp. 20–22. 286 Arrian, Anabasis 1.28.2. 287 Obv.: Draped, armoured and laureate bust of Claudius Gothicus right. AV K M AVP – KΛAV∆ION. – Rev.: On the left Alexander wielding a spear and riding on horseback to the right. In centre the naked figure of Zeus seen from the front, head turned to his left, right hand raised, thunderbolt in left hand, left foot set on a rock. On right side the figure of a Pisidian warrior, moving right, but head turned back, wearing a helmet and holding a sword (?) in his left hand. His right hand reaches for Zeus and his left foot touches the rock under the foot of Zeus. At left bottom an ear of corn. At right denominational mark I (= 10 Assaria/bronze units). A–ΛEΞAN∆POC, in exergue CAΓALAC/ CEΩN. Bronze coins of Sagalassos/Pisidia under Claudius II (ad 268–270). Ref.: BMC Lycia, Pamphylia, and Pisidia p. 250 no. 50 pl. 38.11; SNG Aulock no. 5206 pl. 172; Vermeule (1986) pp. 27–28 fig. 34; G. Calcani, Cavalieri di Bronzo. La torma di Alessandro opera di Lisippo. L’erma di Bretschneider (Rome 1989) pp. 40, 70, 152–153 fig. 74; Weiß (1992) pp. 156, 160–163; Moreno (1995) pp. 169–171 fig. 4.21.1; Stewart (1993) pp. 310–312 fig. 112. – Countermark on obverse: Howgego (1985) p. 142 no. 199 pl. 9 (bust of Tyche left). – Ear of corn relating to supply provided for Roman troops in this region: Weiß (1992) pp. 160, 162–163 fig. 19; Burrell (2004) pp. 266–267. Preferring a more general interpretation as symbol of fertility: P.R. Franke, Zeus, Alessandro e barbaro a Sagalasso in: Moreno (1995) pp. 170–171. 288 Stewart (1993) p. 311.

91

NOTES

289 Weiß (1992) p. 163. 290 Compare e.g. F. Imhoof-Blumer, Beiträge zur Erklärung griechischer Münztypen I: Seefahrende Heroen, Nomisma 5, 1910, p. 32 no. 28 pl. 2.26. 291 Pisidians formed formidable light troops in Hellenistic armies: M. Waelkens (ed.), Sagalassos I. Leuven University Press (Leuven 1993) pp. 19–20; Livius 38. 15.9. 292 Stewart (1993) p. 311. One may also think of the possibility of a painting depicting this scene in a public building. On paintings see M.J. Price, Paintings as a source of inspiration for ancient die engravers in: L. Casson and M.J. Price (eds), Coins, culture, and history in the ancient world. Numismatic and other studies in honor of Bluma L. Trell. Wayne State University Press (Detroit 1981) pp. 69–75. 293 Salzmann (2001) pp. 178–179 and appendix pp. 188–191. 294 For the emblemata on imperial shields in general see C.C. Vermeule, The imperial shield as a mirror of Roman art on medallions and coins in: Scripta Nummaria Romana. Essays presented to Humphrey Sutherland. Spink (London 1978) pp. 177–185; P. Bastien, Le buste monétaire des empereurs romains II. Éditions Numismatique Romaine (Wetteren 1993) pp. 461–472, 478–489, esp. pp. 483–486; M. R.-Alföldi, Schildbilder der römischen Kaiser auf Münzen und Multipla in: H. Bellen and H.-M. von Kaenel (eds), Gloria Romanorum. Schriften zur Spätantike. Historia Einzelschriften 153. Franz Steiner Verlag (Stuttgart 2001) pp. 251–257; D. Alten and C.-F. Zschucke, Die römische Münzserie Beata Tranquillitas in der Prägestätte Trier 321–323 n. Chr. Petermännchen-Verlag (Trier 2004) pp. 84–95. 295 Obv.: Naked laureate bust of young Caracalla left. He rests a spear on his right shoulder and a round shield in front of his body. The sword belt (balteus) is visible on his upper body. In the centre of the shield is depicted Alexander’s head to the left. AV K M AVPH ANTΩNINOC (specimen Aulock . . . AVPHΛI . . .). – Rev.: Mount Argaios with altar. MHTPOΠO – KAICAPIA. On the Altar ET E (year 5). Bronze coin of Caesarea/Kappadokia of ad 197. Ref.: Salzmann (2001) pp. 181, 188 second type no. 2 pl. 26.1–2; Ziegler (2003) p. 127 n. 72; SNG Aulock no. 6506 pl. 222 (wrongly identified as Elagabalus); Auctiones AG Basel, Auction 17 of 7–8 June 1988, lot 372 pl. 17 (wrongly female head on shield); E.A. Sydenham with supplement by A.G. Malloy, The coinage of Caesarea in Cappadocia. Reprint by Attic Books (New York 1978) p. 155 no. 527 d = specimen Aulock (wrongly identified as Elagabalus with aegis on shield). 296 On shield decorations see note above. More common as a scenic representation is the one showing the emperor as a victorious horseman or the emperor on horseback, often accompanied by Nike. 297 Obv.: Laureate and armoured bust of Caracalla left with spear and shield, on breastplate the head of Medusa, across his breast a sword-belt (balteus). On shield the head of Alexander left and above and left figure of Alexander taming Boukephalos. CEB AVT K MA ANTΩNEINOC – Rev.: Eagle with lion, star between its claws. ∆HMAPX EΞ VΠATOC TO ∆. Tetradrachm (billon) of Heliopolis/Roman Syria (modern Lebanon) of ad 215–217. Ref.: Salzmann (2001) pp. 182–184, 190 fourth type no. 3 pl. 27.1–2; BMC Galatia, Cappadocia, and Syria p. 143 no. 44 pl. 17.13 (‘youthful head’); Bellinger (1940) p. 66 no. 215 pl. 15.12–13 (‘rad(iate) (?) head’); Prieur (2000) p. 142 no. 1198 (‘radiate (?) head’). 298 See the section on Koinon bronzes above. 299 Berlin. Münzkabinett Inv. 1908/3 (65.12 g, 47–48 mm, 1 h). Obv.: Laureate and armoured bust to left with sword with eagle hilt, spear and shield. Breastplate

92

NOTES

300

301

302 303

304 305

306 307 308

decorated with head of Medusa. On shield diademed head of Alexander left in centre, above Alexander on horseback hunting a lion. – Rev.: Diademed figure of Alexander sitting on bench right, opposite him Nike presenting Attic helmet to Alexander and holding shield on which the death of Penthesilea at the hands of Achilles is represented (compare a contorniate here plate 28). BACIΛEVC – AΛEIAN∆POC. Ref.: Svoronos (1907) pl. 14.3; Bernardi (1970) p. 86 no. 22 pl. 7.22; Savio (1994/1995) p. 79 E pl. B 4–5; Dressel pp. 11–12 E pl. 2 E. – Ref.: Salzmann (2001) pp. 182, 190 (second type no. 1 a) pl. 26. 3–4. – Lisbon. Museu Calouste Gulbenkian Inv. 2433 (69.42 g, 57 mm, 12 h). Obv.: Ditto, but not same die (against Dressel p. 19), see Bernardi (1970) p. 86 n. 6 (spear carried at different angle). – Rev.: Nereid riding on a sea-centaur right, centaur carries a trident in his right hand and a fish in his left. In the waves four dolphins are visible (same die as Dressel K). Ref.: Svoronos (1907) pl. 14.2; Bernardi (1970) p. 85 no. 21 pl. 7.21; Savio (1994/1995) p. 82 S; Dressel (1906) pp. 19–20 S. – Salzmann (2001) pp. 182, 190 (second type no. 1 a) pl. 26.3–4. Tarsos: AMNG III 1 nos. 872 and 873. – Cambridge: AMNG III 1 no. 875; SNG IV 3 no. 2351. – Koinon: AMNG III 1 nos. 311, 370, 370a, 419, 420, 442b, 558b, 643. All moving to the right; the different direction in case of the Aboukir medallions is caused by the fact that the emperor’s bust itself is turned to the left. Testimony is provided by Salzmann (2001) p. 174 and U. Espinosa, La alejandrofilia de Caracala en la antigua historiografia in: J.M. Croisille (ed.), Neronia IV. Alejandro Magno, modelo de los emperadores romanos. Collection Latomus 209 (Bruxelles 1990) pp. 37–51; A. Bancalari Molina, Relación entre la Constitutio Antoniniana y la imitatio Alexandri de Caracalla, Revista de estudios históricojurídicos 22, 2000, pp. 17–29; B.M. Levick, Caracalla’s path in: Hommages à Marcel Renard II. Collection Latomus 102 (1969) pp. 426–457; A. Johnston, Caracalla’s path: the numismatic evidence, Historia 32, 1983, pp. 58–76. – Compare the installation of Alexander games (Alexandreia, Alexandreia and Pythia respectively) of the Thrakian Koinon at Philippopolis (coins of ad 198–217: LAGM pp. 34–35 s.v. Alexandreia). – Ziegler (2003) pp. 117–118, 120–121 on civic coins in relation to Caracalla and Alexander from Septimius Severus to Caracalla. Salzmann (2001) pp. 181–182, 184. – Compare L. Budde, Severisches Relief in Palazzo Sacchetti. 18. Ergänzungsheft. Jahrbuch des Instituts. (1955) p. 14. Some civic coins show the (living) emperor in a quadriga drawn by elephants, hence not signalling divinisation of a deceased monarch, but again constructing a parallel to Alexander himself, the conqueror of India and the god Dionysos, being prominent for the same deed: Salzmann (2001) pp. 176–177 with examples in n. 27; R. Ziegler, Kaiser, Heer und Städtisches Geld. Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Wien 1993) p. 116 and Ziegler (2003) pp. 120–121. Salzmann (2001) p. 185. Ziegler (2003) pp. 125–126; A. Birley, The African emperor. Septimius Severus. Second edition. Batsford (London 1988) pp. 112–113. – Niger in turn enjoyed comparison with Alexander, too: Dio Cassius 75.6.2 and Z. Rubin, Civilwar propaganda and historiography. Collection Latomus 173 (Brussels 1980) p. 105. Compare Ziegler (2003) p. 125 n. 66 with examples for Septimius Severus. Cass. Dio 78.7.1. Vermeule (1982) p. 62: ‘1863 (some say 1867)’.

93

NOTES

309 F. Gnecchi, I Medaglioni Romani. I. Oro ed Argento (Milan 1912) p. 5 no. 2 pl. 1.9 (weight 51.15 g). 310 Der Neue Pauly 12.1 (2002) col. 609 s.v. Tintinnabulum (A. Dierichs). 311 A. de Longpérier, Trésor de Tarse, Revue Numismatique 1868, pp. 309–336; S.P. Noe, A bibliography of Greek coin hoards, ANS Numismatic Notes and Monographs 78, 1937, p. 279 no. 1064 (the hoard’s burial wrongly dated to ad 227). 312 R. Mowat, Les Médaillons du Trésor de Tarse, Revue Numismatique 1903, p. 1 n. reports the sum of 50,000 Francs paid by Napoleon for three medallions, 23 aurei and the Severus Alexander medallion. Compare A. de Longpérier, Chronique, Revue Numismatique 1869–70, p. 133 (acquisition notice for the medallions, not the aurei). 313 A. de Longpérier, Trésor de Tarse, Revue Numismatique 1868, p. 309 quotes the workmen’s statement, the treasure allegedly having been found within an old church, but quite rightly keeps his doubts on this architecture’s identification. 314 Tarsos. Paris, Bibl. Nat. Inv. F 1671. 98.65 g, 65–68 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Bust of Alexander with lion’s scalp right – Rev.: Alexander on horse hunting a lion with a spear. In exergue AΛEZAN∆POC, on left BA-CIΛEYC. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 873; Svoronos (1907) pl. 8.1; Bernardi (1970) 81 no. 1 pl. 1.1; Savio (1994/1995) p. 74 no. 1. – Tarsos. Paris, Bibl. Nat. Inv. 1673. 93.85 g, 64–67 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Diademed armoured bust of Philip II left. Breastplate decorated with scene showing Ganymede being kidnapped by Zeus’ eagle. – Rev.: Nike in chariot driving to the right, holds palm-branch in left hand. Left BACIΛE, top WC, in exergue AΛEΞAN∆POY. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 874; Svoronos (1907) pl. 8.3; Bernardi (1970) p. 81 no. 2 pl. 1.2; Savio (1994/1995) p. 74 no. 2. – Tarsos. Paris, Bibl. Nat. 110.3 g, 68–70 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Diademed head of Alexander with hair flying horizontally right. – Rev.: Lion hunt as on first piece from Tarsos, possibly from the same die. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 872; Svoronos (1907) pl. 8.2; Bernardi (1970) p. 81 no. 3 pl. 1.3; Savio (1994/1995) p. 74 no. 3. 315 Longpérier op. cit. pp. 310–311, 313–314; Dressel (1906) p. 54; Bieber (1964) pp. 20–21 fig. 1; Vermeule (1982) p. 61. 316 See G.M.A. Richter, The portraits of the Greeks III. Phaidon Press (London 1965) p. 253; G.M.A. Richter (abridged and revised by R.R.R. Smith), The portraits of the Greeks. Phaidon Press (Oxford 1985) p. 224; Smith (1988) Appendix III for references. Compare also a terracotta bowl with ruler portrait: G.M.A. Richter, Greek portraits III, Collection Latomus 48 (Bruxelles 1960) p. 46 no. 201 pl. 44 (‘Perhaps a Hellenistic (Macedonian?) ruler.’). – M.R. Kaiser-Raiss, Philipp II. und Kyzikos, Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau 63, 1984, pp. 27–43 recognises ‘Philip’ on electrum staters from Kyzikos (H. von Fritze, Die Elektronprägung von Kyzikos, Nomisma 7, 1912, p. 14 nos. 197–199 pl. 6.9–11). – H. Wrede, Die spätantike Hermengalerie von Welschbillig. Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 32. Rheinisches Landesmuseum Trier. Walter de Gruyter (Berlin 1972) pp. 49–52 pl. 7.1–2; 8.1 suggests the same for a bust with sword-belt from this site. For the ivory heads from Vergina, a portrait from Copenhagen, and a mosaic from Baalbek from late antiquity, the last of these today in the National Museum of Beirut, showing the family of Philip II, see Richter, op. cit. (1965) 253 and Richter, op. cit. (1985) p. 224; Smith (1988) pp. 62–63 (Vergina). 317 AMNG III 1 pp. 25, 192 no. 874. – M. Papisca, Immagini ‘della imitatio Alexandri’ in età severiana. I medaglioni di Tarso in: Ancient Macedonia VI 2 (1999) pp. 859–871, esp. pp. 863–866 again tries to revive this erroneous interpretation. For earlier such attempts compare Dressel (1906) p. 54 n. 2.

94

NOTES

318 For Caracalla’s portrait see K. Fittschen and P. Zanker, Katalog der römischen Porträts in den Capitolinischen Museen und den anderen kommunalen Sammlungen der Stadt Rom I. Kaiser- und Prinzenbildnisse. Second edition. Philipp von Zabern (Mainz 1994) pp. 105–108, 110–112 nos. 91 and 94 pl. 110–112, 115–116. This type was created in ad 212 after Geta’s murder; in use mainly ad 212–215 according to coins (ibid. p. 106 with n. 3) and replaced by a more static version (‘2. Alleinherrschertypus’ or type Tivoli), see ibid. pp. 110–112 no. 94. References for coins: ibid. p. 111 n. 5. Compare S. Wood, Roman portrait sculpture 217–260 a.d. Brill (Leiden 1986) pp. 28–30 fig. 1–2. 319 Compare Smith (1988) Appendix III last section; Bieber (1964) pp. 20–21 fig. 1. 320 Stewart (1993) pp. 133, 162 (with references); Hardie (1985) pp. 11–31, esp. pp. 29–31 fig. 2. For this inscription see IG XIV 1296. – Compare the Anthologia Graeca 16. 122; Stewart (1993) p. 393 T 114. 321 Dressel (1906) pp. 3–4 n. 1; J. Eddé, Les trouvailles de trésors monétaires en Egypte, Bullettino di Numismatica 1905, p. 140: ‘. . . trouvé dans une vieille ruine appelée kharaba en arabe – ce qui veut dire ruiner . . .’; O. Rubensohn, Griechisch-Römische Funde in Ägypten, Jahrbuch des Instituts (Archäologischer Anzeiger) 17, 1902, p. 46: ‘bei Alexandrien, wie es heißt, in Abukir’. 322 The majority are of Diocletianus and Maximianus Herculius, but also included is an aureus of Balbinus (former Evans Coll., RIC IV 2 p. 170 no. 8), a quinarius, and a five-aurei piece of Carinus (for the latter see O. Voetter, Slg. Bachhofen von Echt. P. Gerin (Vienna 1903) p. 130 no. 2290 pl. 43). Compare Dressel (1906) p. 4 n. 2. 323 Two of the bars found their way to the British Museum (and are currently on display in the HSBC Money Gallery), a third is reported in trade by Dressel in 1906 (presumably later purchased by J.P. Morgan) and a fourth was cut into four pieces with the intention of melting it down, which actually happened to the remaining bullion. The composition of the hoard is described by Dressel (1906) pp. 3–4 n. 2; S.P. Noe, A bibliography of Greek coin hoards, ANS Numismatic Notes and Monographs 78, 1937, pp. 14–15 no. 6. 324 Constantius I died 25 July 305 ad and only if there were coins of later emperors should we expect that the burial date would have been substantially later. Maximianus ruled as Caesar from ad 285, as Augustus from ad 286 onwards. He resigned together with Diocletianus in ad 305, but coins in his name were produced until his death in ad 310. 325 Dressel (1906) pp. 3–4 mentions these doubts and gives references for his sources p. 4 n. 1. – The homogeneousness of all these objects is accepted in general, however, and can now hardly be proved or disproved after the event. 326 For a catalogue of these medallions see Dressel (1906) pp. 7–20; Savio (1994/ 1995) passim; Bernardi (1970) passim. Vermeule (1982) passim with various alternatives for the place of production and strong arguments for a date of c. ad 222–235. They are all struck from gold flans and their weights range from 120.06 down to 47.45 grams with no consideration of any weight standard. 327 Hunting a boar (as on Dressel F and T) allowed a young Makedonian to recline at the men’s table: Athenaios 1.18. Compare Stewart (1993) p. 51 n. 24. – The scene’s composition is taken from prototypes showing a young hero, e.g. grave reliefs. See E. Pfuhl and H. Möbius, Die ostgriechischen Grabreliefs II. Philipp von Zabern (Mainz 1979) pp. 334–337 no. 1400, 1406–1410, 1412–1415, 1418 pl. 205–206. 328 The latter representation of Dressel L is clearly taken from Roman prototypes

95

NOTES

329

330

331

332 333 334 335

336 337

and draws our attention to the fact that this world of Alexander images is one of blending traditions and contemporary designs and appreciations. For portraits of Olympias (only the pieces from Aboukir and contorniates represent extant examples): see G.M.A. Richter, The portraits of the Greeks III. Phaidon Press (London 1965) p. 254; G.M.A. Richter (abridged and revised by R.R.R. Smith), The portraits of the Greeks. Phaidon Press (Oxford 1985) p. 225. Compare Nau (1968) pp. 49–66. See section on the Makedonian Koinon above, and for inscriptions mentioning Divus Antoninus (Caracalla) after his death restricted to the period ad 218–235. See J. Fejfer in: T. Fischer-Hansen et al. (eds), Ancient portraiture: Image and message. Acta Hyperborea 4 (1992) pp. 209–213, 216–217; A. Mastino, Le titolatura di Caracalla e Geta attraverso le iscrizioni (indici). Studia di storia antica 5. Clueb (Bologna 1981) pp. 78–80. Inscriptions after ad 217 ibid. p. 143–146. Post ad 235 solely IGBulg III no. 884 = AE 1907 no. 48 = IGR I no. 1481 of c. ad 250–260 and CIL VI no. 1682 from ad 334. There are in particular no posthumous honours for Caracalla recorded on behalf of Gordian III or Philip the Arab. But compare P. Weiß, Ein Altar für Gordian III., die älteren Gordiane und die Severer aus Aigeai, Chiron 12, 1982, pp. 191–205 for an altar from Aigeai, which might explain the rare case of venerating Severans under Gordian III. See ibid. esp. pp. 195–198 explaining this as a product of opposition towards the emperor Maximinus Thrax. There still is no agreement among scholars on the function, recipients, place of origin and the exact date of production of these medallions: see the references quoted above for various alternatives from Caracalla to Gordianus III. In the light of the Makedonian connection their production under Elagabalus and especially Severus Alexander seems very likely. I personally think that they were not distributed by the emperor or his court, but, in the light of their varying fineness, produced to the order of a private individual, most probably one of the leading figures in Beroia and presiding at the games. For an analysis of the fineness of those medallions now kept in Lisbon see J.M. Peixoto Cabral, L.C. Alves and M. Castro Hipólito, Análise não-destrutiva dos medalhões de Abuquir pertencentes à Colecção Calouste Gulbenkian in: M. Castro Hipólito, D.M. Metcalf et al., Homenagem a Mário Gomes Marques (Sintra 2000) pp. 401–417. Compare the fictional report on Alexander even reaching Rome in the Alexander Romance: Stoneman (1991) pp. 61, 166–167. A. and E. Alföldi, Die Kontorniat-Medaillons I–II. Walter de Gruyter (Berlin/ New York 1976/1990) pp. 80–87, 109–111; Mittag (1999) pp. 164–166; Vermeule (1986) passim. Mittag (1999) pp. 27–50, 182–213 for their function and use. The earliest example for the general use of this epithet dates from the second half of the third century bc (Plautus, Mostellaria 775, going back on the Greek work of Philemon of c. 288 bc terminus post quem). See J. Ma, Antiochus III and the cities of western Asia Minor. Oxford University Press (Oxford 1999) pp. 272–273 n. 6; P.P. Spranger, ‘Der Große’. Zur Entstehung des historischen Beinamens in der Antike, Saeculum 8, 1958, pp. 22–58 esp. pp. 31–32; H.H. Schmitt, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte Antiochos’ des Großen und seiner Zeit. Historia Einzelschriften 6. Franz Steiner Verlag (Wiesbaden 1964) p. 95 no. 5; C. Rubincam, A tale of two ‘Magni’: Justin/Trogus on Alexander and Pompey, Historia 54, 2005, pp. 265–274. Alexander’s image on amulets: Mittag (1999) pp. 164–166. The diademed king with windblown hair and the scene of Achilles slaying

96

NOTES

Penthesilea shown on Alexander’s shield. Such a scene is also shown on a chryselephontine shield from the ‘tomb of Philip’: M. Andronicos, Vergina. The Royal Tombs. Exdotike Athenon (Athens 1984) pp. 136–140, illus. 91–93. Reference owed to I. Touratsoglou – On the other hand the tilted head of some Alexander portraits on coins and contorniates formed the model for a characteristic portraittype of Constantine the Great from ad 324 onwards. It emphasised the ruler’s contact with the heavenly powers and was later also understood as a sign of his Christian belief: P.M. Brown, The Roman Imperial Coinage VII. Spink (London 1966) p. 33 with references. 2 MAN, KING, HERO AND GOD 1 For this reason coins such as e.g. one showing an unbearded Herakles with lion’s scalp from Prousias at the Hypios [W.H. Waddington, E. Babelon and Th. Reinach, Recueil général des monnaies grecques d’Asie mineure I 4. E. Leroux Éditeur (Paris 1910) p. 606 no. 26 pl. 104.11] are excluded. 2 AMNG III 1 p. 15 and nos. 760–764. 3 Gaebler (1906) p. 23. 4 Compare Pliny’s polemical statement on Hellenistic art in his Natural History 34.52. 5 Zervos (1974) pp. 381–382, 388. 6 Giard (1991) p. 310 n. 10. Compare Bellinger (1963) pp. 15–16. – e.g. F. Smith, L’immagine di Alessandro il Grande sulle monete del regno (336–323 a.C.). Edizioni Ennerre (Milan 2000) pp. 19–44. 7 Smith (1988) pp. 12–13, 109–112. 8 Advocates of such an interpretation are listed by Stewart (1993) p. 158 n. 3. 9 Stewart (1993) pp. 159, 297–306. 10 M.J. Price, Coins of the Macedonians. British Museum Publications (London 1974) p. 43 no. 52 pl. 10. See also a stater from Philippi: ibid. p. 42 no. 45 pl. 8. Compare Bellinger (1963) pp. 13–14. 11 Smith (1988) pp. 12, 109. Compare F.L. Holt, Portraits in precious metals: Alexander the Great and numismatic art in: D. Pandermalis, Alexander the Great. Exhibition catalogue. Alexander S. Onassis Public Benefit Foundation (New York 2004) pp. 37–39. – In contrast to e.g. Persian satrapical coinage H.A. Cahn, Zwei griechische Miszellen, in: R. Margolis and H. Voegtli (eds), Numismatics – Witness to History (Wetteren 1986) pp. 11–14 with references; Howgego (1995) pp. 46–48. 12 For Alexander’s coinage see Price (1991a) pp. 29–31. 13 Always selected from individual dies and not representative of a whole issue: this hypothesis intensively elaborated by K. Gebauer, Alexanderbildnis und Alexandertypus, Athenische Mitteilungen 63/64, 1938/1939, pp. 2–18 pl. 1–3. – For a detailed discussion of various works supporting Gebauer’s view compare Bellinger (1963) pp. 13–27, esp. pp. 17–19, who himself rejects this hypothesis. 14 Compare Price (1991a) p. 33; Stewart (1993) pp. 158–159 esp. n. 3: ‘plus every numismatist whom I have consulted personally’ (rejecting the existence of such a crypto-portrait of Alexander). – There was a similar fruitless discussion in the case of his father Philip’s coinage and an alleged portrait of him in the guise of the laureate head of Zeus on the obverse: compare Price (1991a) p. 33 n. 3 with references. 15 Albania in the late 1920s/early 1930s: Ch.L. Krause and C. Mishler, 2002 standard catalogue of world coins. 29th edition. Krause Publications (Iola 2002) no. 5. – Greece: ibid. no. 159. The latter coin served as very much a political instrument in the struggle for supremacy over the cultural heritage of ancient Makedonia.

97

NOTES

16

17 18 19 20

21

22 23 24

25

26

27 28

The Republic of Greece issued these coins in 1991 (not 1990 as their legend claims) to prevent the (former Yugoslav) Republic of Macedonia from using the star of Vergina as its state emblem. See G. Schön, Welt Münzkatalog. 32. Auflage. Battenberg (Munich 2003) no. 58. In use on posthumous Lysimachi and also copied by his son Ptolemaios of Telmessos. – As the example of the Makedonian Koinon shows, they are heavily outnumbered by conventional diademed portraits (without ram’s horn), but also in existence among the medallions Dressel A, F, and G from Aboukir. Both clearly derive from Lysimachos’ design. AMNG III 1 nos. 526–529a. The latter die was reworked later, and unfortunately the identity of dies involved is not confirmed. Compare Gaebler (1906) p. 23 n. 1 pl. 2.34–35. Early coins from Aigeai of the second and first centuries bc do not necessarily represent Alexander. Hence this type is only extant on coins from the Roman period. The sole exception is one contorniate die with a bearded Alexander [obverse die XIX, see Mittag (1999) pl. 2]. The medallions from Aboukir Dressel C, K and L with a frontal bust of Alexander feature light whiskers. Compare Schreiber (1903) p. 184. Koinon bronzes feature both types (AMNG III 1 p. 15), and so do contorniates (obv. dies XIV–XVIII, XX with flying hair, see Mittag (1999) pl. 2). – Alexander’s frontal bust of Dressel C, K and L possibly indicates a similar feature with the hair at his temples. The portrait of Alexander on the coins of Aesillas differs in its flame-like locks and the fact that the hair at his temples does not follow this direction, but simply falls vertically. – Compare the description of the monument of Alexander on horseback as founder of Alexandria, erected by Ptolemy: Pseudo-Libanios, Progymnasmata 27.4 (around ad 400). He stresses Alexander’s windblown hair moving while the king is riding his horse. Compare Stewart (1993) pp. 252, 397–398 S 18 and T 126. See Smith (1988) p. 99 pl. 77.14; Fleischer (1991) pp. 68–69. Fleischer (1991) p. 69. See the examples named above (Koinon Makedonon, Tarsos and contorniates), all additionally sharing the same physiognomic features, anastolé and tilted head. The medallions from Aboukir feature no portrait of Alexander with the diadem (apart from the one frontal bust), but the type with ram’s horn (Dressel A, F and G). In this case his hair remains much more motionless following its prototype, the design of Lysimachos. See Schreiber (1903) p. 184. – Also true for a small gold medallion in Oxford [SNG Ashmolean Museum V 3. Macedonia no. 3311 pl. 68 (London 1976)]. – Only one die of a coin from Nikaia is earlier: Recueil I 3 no. 191 pl. 71. 21; E.J. Waddell New York, Auction 1, 9 December 1982, lot 109 pl. 7. In addition to Koinon bronzes and contorniates also found during the third century ad in Aigeai (SNG Cilicie no. 2348 pl. 131), Alexandria kat’Isson in ad 231/232 (SNG Levante no. 1851 pl. 125), Nikaia in Bithynia in ad 222–235 (SNG Aulock no. 627 pl. 19), and less obvious in Gerasa under Septimius Severus [Spijkerman (1978) pp. 164–165 nos. 29, 31 pl. 34] and Elagabalus (ibid. pp. 166–167 nos. 34–35 pl. 35). Hence an imitation by likenesses of Alexander in the third century ad of Caracalla, who himself imitated Alexander: J.J. Bernoulli, Die erhaltenen Darstellungen Alexanders des Großen. F. Bruckmann (Munich 1905) pp. 29–30. Compare the obverses of RPC II nos. 1786–1787 pl. 82. – Compare Lichtenberger (2003) p. 122 suggesting the possible deliberate blending of the portrait of Alexander and an emperor in the case of Kapitolias.

98

NOTES

29 Compare portraits of Philip V and Perseus: Smith (1988) pl. 74.9–11. 30 Compare Pseudo-Libanios, Progymnasmata 27.3 saying that Alexander’s monument as founder of Alexandria, although wearing armour, lacks his helmet because the conqueror of the world would have no need of such a requisite. See Stewart (1993) pp. 172, 252, 397–398 S 18 and T 126. 31 On Alexander’s helmet see Stewart (1993) p. 203; Holt (2003) pp. 118–120. 32 Silver coins of Seleukos I with an idealised youthful head wearing an Attic helmet decorated with a panther skin are considered to represent portraits of Seleukos and not Alexander. See above. 33 The Koinon bronzes never feature an additional holder for the plumes such as the ones known from the gold medallions. – There is one enigmatic medallion in Athens with cheek pieces: Touratsoglou (2000) p. 79 with illustr.; N. Koltsas (ed.), Agon. Catalogue National Museum Athens (Athens 2004) pp. 68–69 fig. 4–5; E. Glytsi in: Nike – Victoria on coins and medals. Catalogue Athens (Athens 2004) p. 12 fig. 1 (rev.); Bernardi (1970) pp. 86, 89; Savio (1994/1995) pp. 95–96 β; M.R. Jenkins, The Euboae Niketerion, Athens Annals of Archaeology 19, 1986, pp. 114–118. It remains, however, very doubtful whether this specimen is actually genuine, as it clearly bears traces of being produced by casting. 34 AMNG III 1 no. 729 of ad 238–244. See also SNG Tübingen no. 1234 pl. 48 (= AMNG no. 729.5 with elaborated plumes); Gaebler (1906) p. 28 pl. 3.46. 35 Price (1991a) p. 29. Compare W.B. Kaiser, Alexanders Goldmünzen, Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau 65, 1986, pp. 41–57, esp. pp. 52–54. 36 AMNG III 1 no. 446 (four horsemen, Nike and a fallen foe) and nos. 767, 778 (two riders and foe). 37 With the exception of one reverse-die again showing the king on horseback, but this time wearing a helmet. See Mittag (1999) rev.-die 11 pl. 25. 38 For the now partly outdated chronological sequence see AMNG III 1 pp. 15, 19 and pl. 4.18–19 (type F and H illustrated). 39 This type was dated to the reign of Philip the Arab in AMNG, but a new specimen in Duisburg [Sammlung Köhler-Osbahr III 1 (Duisburg 2004) p. 108 no. 584 pl. 40] combines it with a reverse of c. ad 231–235. One coin in Copenhagen is misdescribed in AMNG and actually belongs to the time of Gordianus III: AMNG III 1 no. 569. 1 = SNG Copenhagen no. 1366 pl. 35. Compare K. Dahmen, The Alexander busts of the Macedonian Koinon – New evidence for sequence and chronology, The Numismatic Chronicle 2005, pp. 179–181. 40 See H.R. Baldus, Uranius Antoninus. Münzprägung und Geschichte. Antiquitas 11. R. Habelt Verlag (Bonn 1971) pp. 128–134, pointing out the use of this detail as an abbreviation of a full figure. 41 Related to the marble head of Alexander from Pergamon. See Bieber (1964) pp. 65, 80 fig. 71–72, 114; Stewart (1993) pp. 332–333 fig. 128–130. 42 Compare Dressel (1906) pp. 61–62. – Another draped, armoured, and diademed bust of Alexander (seen from the front) to the right is known only from a drawing of the early eighteenth century. It is closely modelled on type H of the Koinon, including the physiognomy. Compare AMNG III 1 no. 876. – A much more emotive and later version of type F is represented by a one-sided medallion of the Six Collection. See AMNG III 1 no. 884; J.P. Guépin, Alexander Promachus in: Festoen. Festschrift A.N. Zadoks-Josephus Jitta. H.D. Tjeenk Willink (Groningen 1976) pp. 315, 317 fig. 13. Its facial features are fundamentally different from those of the other medallions and Koinon bronzes. – Also unique is another small medallion with a bust of a laureate Herakles: AMNG III 1 no. 879.

99

NOTES

1

2

3 4

5

6

7 8

9

3 MAKING GOOD USE OF A LEGEND We do not know who was responsible either for the production of the famous elephant medallions or for the early bronze coins from Memphis and Naukratis in Egypt. See discussion above. Nevertheless there is no doubt that Ptolemy was indeed the first to produce several continuous issues making Alexander’s image the icon of approximately the first twenty years of his rule before taking the royal diadem himself. Compare Bosworth (2002) p. 42 on Ptolemy’s potential and contrasting attitude towards Philippos Arrhidaios on the one hand and Alexander IV on the other. It is not possible to match the development of coin designs with related main historical events between 317 and 310 bc such as the settlement of Triparadeios and the death of Alexander’s heir. See note above. For references on the meeting of the Diadochi at Triparadeisos see Billows (1990) pp. 68–71. Outside Mesopotamia and adjacent eastern provinces Seleukid coin production begins in Syria only around 300 bc (the very time Alexander’s image appears in the eastern part of this kingdom), and in Asia Minor and Kilikia only 10 years later. Compare SC I pp. 3–5. Hadley (1974) p. 54 interprets this geographical restriction in the use of Alexander’s portrait as a reaction to Antigonid troops who recently joined Seleukos’ side and were now garrisoned in this region. – Stewart (1993) p. 317 considers the use of Alexander as a sign of the strong relationship Seleukos maintained with the heartland of Persia, where he married an indigenous woman, being the only one of Alexander’s former lieutenants not to divorce in favour of a Makedonian woman later. Hence he would present himself as a legitimate successor of Alexander especially in the eyes of the indigenous nobility. Certainly both arguments have their justification, but one has to be careful not to read too much into this area from which the coins in question originate. Where else could Seleukos have them minted around 300 bc, still being restricted to this region before finally reaching out to the Mediterranean? The pragmatic decision he took by discontinuing representations of Alexander on his coins in consequence makes it unreasonable to transfer his image to the western mints of Seleukos’ now enlarged kingdom. Compare his speech addressing troops in 311 bc: Diod. 19.90.2–4. See Hadley (1974) p. 53; Stewart (1993) pp. 265, 313; Bosworth (2002) pp. 233–234. – In general Alexander played only a very minor role in Seleukid iconography: compare Hoover (2002) p. 54. ESM p. 112; WSM p. 380. – On the treaty with the Mauryan king Chandragupta who gave 500 elephants in return for Seleukos’ sacrifice of his claims and subsequent ceding of territories see Stewart (1993) pp. 313–324 with n. 72. These are not issued around 305 bc, but some five years later. Their reverses depicting Nike obviously also relate to a victory such as the one of 301 bc. Their regional restriction to eastern mints, however, shows that strangely enough there was no intention to commemorate such a victory in the newly opened Syrian mints. Seleukos’ assumption of the royal title on his return from the East clearly shows that his claim to power was based on his earlier military successes following in Alexander’s footsteps, while Ipsos finally secured his rule and that of others. Plautus, Mostellaria 775–776: ‘were a pair who did mighty big things’. – As Agathokles had no reason to present himself as one of Alexander’s successors in matters of territory, nor could he play any personal part in his campaigns, comparing himself with Alexander must have its origins in a truly daring

100

NOTES

10

11 12 13 14 15

16 17 18

19 20 21 22

23 24 25 26 27 28

self-characterisation. For a long-term policy and rule in Sicily, however, Alexander proved less suited; different images consequently appear on Agathokles’ coinage. This is valid only for the royal coinage in silver and gold while the bronzes focus on more general (Makedonian) topics (Athena, Herakles, walking lion). For these bronzes see R. Ashton, The coins of the Macedonian kings, Lysimachus and Eupolemus in the museums of Fethiye and Afyon in: A. Burnett, U. Wartenberg and R. Witschonke (eds), Coins of Macedonia and Rome: Essays in honour of Charles Hersh. Spink (London 1998) pp. 43–44 and (though outdated) L. Müller, Die Münzen des thracischen Königs Lysimachus (Copenhagen 1858) pp. 3–5, 8, 11–14 pl. 2.10–14. It would be tempting to identify Alexander on one of these bronze types, e.g. the one featuring a head wearing a Phrygian-type helmet on the obverse: compare e.g. SNG Copenhagen nos. 1164–1167 pl. 24; Müller ibid. pp. 13–14 (‘Perseus’). – We do not know what Lysimachos would have done had he survived his last battle at Kouropedion in 281 bc. Stewart (1993) pp. 319–320. Plut. Pyrrh. 12.7. Leschhorn (1984) pp. 254–257. Plut. Demetr. 25.4; Plut. mor. 823 C–D; Athen. 6.261 b. G.F. Hill, Greek coins acquired by the British Museum, The Numismatic Chronicle 1912, p. 145 no. 24 pl. 7.8; G.F. Hill, Coins of southern Asia Minor in: Anatolian Studies. Festschrift W. Ramsey. Manchester University Press (Manchester 1923) pp. 207–212 no. 3 pl. 9.4. – For this identification see W. Huß, Noch einmal: Ptolemaios der Sohn, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 149, 2004, p. 232 (with references). M. Mitchiner, Indo-Greek and Indo-Scythian coinage I. Hawkins Publications (London 1975) pp. 78–79. Stewart (1993) p. 326. See above. One of the medallions from Aboukir (Dressel G) possibly features a similar expression reading ‘of the kings the Philips’. Compare Dressel (1906) pp. 53, 69; J.M.C. Toynbee, Greek imperial medallions, Journal of Roman Studies 34, 1944, p. 70: Alexander and his two royal ancestors Philip I and II. B.V. Head, Historia Numorum. Spink (London 1963 Reprint of second edition 1911) p. 241: the latter alternative is much more reasonable than that directed at the Roman emperor Philip the Arab and his son. See section on Koinon above. Remarkably Alexander’s birthplace Pella never issued any coinage referring to its greatest son. ‘Ktistes’ in the case of Gerasa, ‘Genarches’ of the citizens of Kapitolias. On the topic of stressing Makedonian origins on coins and related civic testimonies compare Leschhorn (1984) pp. 217–223. Compare LAGM p. 193 s. v. MAKE∆ΩN: Blaundos and Hyrkaneis in Lydia, Peltai and Dikomeion in Phrygia. For an example from the first city see C.J. Howgego in: CIRP p. 6 pl. 1.2.19. In Peltai: ‘Demos Makedonon’ combined with a head in Alexander’s Herakles-type, reverse horseman (Alexander?) to right. SNG Aulock Nachräge IV no. 8432 pl. 292. In neither case do we know of any literary source. Compare the list in Mittag (1999) pp. 277–278, 289–290. Leschhorn (1991) pp. 448–449. For the Hellenistic period compare Leschhorn (1984) pp. 212–216, for the Roman period ibid. pp. 217–223. Leschhorn (1984) pp. 1, 3–5. In Gerasa under Elagabalus it is simply ‘Alexander the Makedonian’. From the same period are coins from Aigeai showing a diademed head, which is possibly a portrait of a Seleukid ruler rather than Alexander himself. Under Trajan showing the standing figure of the founder i.e. Alexander.

101

NOTES

29 The years between ad 193 and 217 are generally considered the most productive ones in matters of civic and provincial issues: Leschhorn (1998) p. 414; W. Leschhorn, Le monnayage impérial d’Asie Mineure et la statistique in: C. Carcassonne and T. Hackens (eds), Statistics and numismatics. Table ronde Paris 1979 (Louvain-la-Neuve 1981) pp. 252–266. 30 Not included (either under Septimius Severus or under Caracalla) are the Alexander busts on imperial shields (Caesarea in Kappadokia and Heliopolis in Syria). 31 Plus the Makedonian Koinon from ad 218–246 (including Beroia only from Gordianus III onwards). 32 I do not include simply reverse types, but each case of combination of an (Alexander) reverse with a new obverse e.g. an imperial portrait with changed bust-type. This makes it much easier to assess the numbers of series distributed. 33 Time of Commodus: in Kapitolias one type (head); in Nikaia eight (head of A.) plus two (figure of A.); in Alexandria in the Troad three (A. standing) and another three (A. on horseback). Total of 17 different coin-types. 34 Alexandria in the Troad (always with Caracalla on obv., two types from ad 210–215), one type (A. standing) and two types (A. on horseback); Apollonia Mordiaion four types (head); Gerasa one type (head); Kapitolias one type (head); Abila and Kapitolias one type (figures of Seleukos and A.). Total of 10 coin-types. 35 Alexandria in the Troad one type (A. on horseback); Gerasa one type (head); Alexandria kat’Isson one type (figure). Total of three coin-types (plus Caesarea in Kappadokia and Heliopolis with Caracalla holding an Alexander-shield, each one type). 36 Elagabalus: Alexandria in the Troad three types (A. on horseback); Gerasa one type (head); Caesarea three types (temple). Total of seven coin-types. – Severus Alexander: Nikaia one type (head); Alexandria in the Troad one type (A. standing) and one type (A. on horseback); Alexandria kat’Isson one type (head). Total of four coin-types. – This excludes the coinage of the Makedonian League, whose large numbers of different types would distort the picture of the time in question. As they are a remarkable and characteristic group in their own right, this seems to be justified (contorniates and gold medallions are not included here for obvious reasons). 37 Aigeai provides four different coin-types in ad 217–218. 38 See Lichtenberger (2003) p. 344; Der Neue Pauly 12.2 (2002) s. v. Zweite Sophistik pp. 851–852 (A. Schäfer). Compare B. Borg (ed.), Paideia. The world of the second Sophistic. Walter de Gruyter (Berlin/New York 2004), see esp. P. Weiß ibid. pp. 179–197. 4 EXCURSUS: ALEXANDER IN DISGUISE 1 For the Alexander Romance see Stoneman (1991) passim; G. Cary, The medieval Alexander. Cambridge University Press (Cambridge 1956) passim; W.J. Alerts, J.M.M. Hermans and E. Visser (eds), Alexander the Great in the Middle Ages. Alfa (Nijmegen 1978) passim. – On medieval representations of Alexander (in the generalised type of a contemporary king wearing a crown) in manuscripts and sculpture see Kraft (1965) p. 12 pl. 1.14. – The impact of Alexander’s personality and image on European art: N. Hadjinicolaou (ed.), Alexander the Great in European art. Catalogue of an exhibition (Thessalonika 1997); Spencer (2002) pp. 205–218. 2 R. Weiss, The Renaissance discovery of Classical antiquity. Blackwell (Oxford 1969) pp. 167–179. 3 See Giard (1991) pp. 309–315; Kraft (1965) pp. 7–32; F. de Callataÿ, Numisma-

102

NOTES

4

5

6 7

8

9

10 11 12

tique et glyptique, Revue des archéologues et historiens d’art de Louvain 30, 1997, p. 144. On Andrea Fulvio: John Cunnally, Images of the illustrious. The numismatic presence in the Renaissance. Princeton University Press (Princeton 1999) pp. 52–69, 189– 190 esp. p. 64 fig. 29 = A. Fulvio, Illustrium Imagines (Rome 1517). See also Cunnally ibid. pp. 21, 101 fig. 10: G. Rouille, Promptuaire etc. Vol. I (Lyons 1553) p. 131. For the Baroque period see e.g. G. Cuper, De Elephantis in nummis obviis (The Hague 1719) p. 63. – As Cyriac of Ancona did previously in 1445 when describing a gem: Giard (1991) p. 311. Kraft (1965) pp. 13–16; Giard (1991) pp. 311–314. See e.g. the case of the Frenchman Charles Le Brun (1619–1690), who worked for Louis XIV: Kraft (1965) p. 13 n. 12; Giard (1991) p. 313 n. 27 with references. See now M. Gareau, Charles Le Brun: first painter to King Louis XIV. Harry N. Abrams (New York 1992) pp. 196–225. – For ideal sculpture of figures with a Corinthian helmet still taken as Alexander: Bieber (1964) pp. 74–75. Kraft (1965) pp. 9–12 with several examples. Cunnally ibid. p. 101; Kraft (1965) p. 11 pl. 1.8 [e.g. in Rouille’s Promptuaire. Vol. I p. 131]. – Still found with E.Q. Visconti, Iconographie grecque. II (Paris 1831) pp. 101–102 pl. 41.4, 5, 7. – Alexander wearing an elephant’s scalp correctly identified by Cuper, De Elephantis in nummis obviis p. 49, but on p. 55 the same portrait on bronze coins is identified as one of Ptolemy because the legend bears his name. M. Daly Davis, Die antiken Münzen in der frühen antiquarischen Literatur in: G. Satzinger (ed.), Die Renaissance-Medaille in Italien und Deutschland. RhemaVerlag (Münster 2004) p. 381 [referring to Constanzo Landi, In veterum numismatum Romanorum miscellanea explicationes (Lyons 1560) in the chapter Lysimachi Numisma]. Kraft (1965) pp. 11–12 notes 9 and 10; Giard (1991) p. 311: Johanis Fabri in imagines illustrium ex Fulvii Ursini Bibliotheca commentarius. Theodoro Gallaeo expressas. (Antwerp 1606) p. 7 pl. 5. – A number of authentic representations of Alexander on ancient coins were actually known: Ch. Patin, Imperatorum Romanorum numismata. S. Paulli (Strasbourg 1671) p. 14 [compare H. Gaebler, Zur Münzkunde Makedoniens IV., Zeitschrift für Numismatik 24, 1904, p. 322 and n. 3. (Koinon of Makedonia, A. on column)]. The same author illustrates a number of other Koinon bronzes, though the drawing on p. 9 shows the Attic helmet of Alexander replaced by a Corinthian one. On p. 279 a reverse from Alexandria Troas is misunderstood as Diana on horseback. – S. Haverkamp, Allgemeene Historie der zaaken in Asie, Afrika en Europe I (The Hague 1736) illustrates coins of Aesillas on pl. 25. 9–10; of Smyrna pl. 27. 6–8; Apollonia Mordiaion pl. 25. 12; Koinon Makedonon pl. 23–25. Alexander’s Athena staters are correctly identified as showing the goddess on pl. 17.5–12. For his life and work see P. Attwood, Italian medals c. 1530–1600. I. The British Museum Press (London 2003) pp. 379–383. Giard (1991) p. 311 n. 15–16 with references. Ibid. p. 312 n. 19–20 with references.

CONCLUSION 1 Solely late Roman contorniates, at least those with Alexander’s portraits and not contemporary Roman emperors, were produced by private demand. 2 In contrast to sources from ancient literature, there is no negative image of Alexander on coins. For negative appraisals, mainly aimed at his frequent

103

NOTES

3 4 5 6

7 8

9 10

11 12

13 14

15

drunkenness and subsequent lack of self-control, compare Spencer (2002) passim; Stoneman (2004) pp. 115–117. Compare the introduction on the dangers of much too optimistic approaches of identification and the poor basis of confirmed portraits of Alexander in sculpture. Stewart (1993) p. 166. Stewart (1993) pp. 199–200 pl. 8 fig. 66–67. With aegis, eagle and shield. Stewart (1993) pp. 191–199 and T 62. Compare also ibid. p. 193 n. 7 and coins of Nikaia (here pl. 13). – In the case of Apelles’ painting we only know that Alexander was depicted, was wearing some kind of costume and carrying a thunderbolt; there is no information on the statue-type. Compare Stewart (1993) p. 203 fig. 36 on paintings in graves from Makedonia. The helmeted head with a panther skin and bull’s horn is here not considered a portrait of Alexander. In any case, it possibly refers to a certain model as the full figure of such a rider appears on Seleukid coins, too: A. Houghton and A. Stewart, The equestrian portrait of Alexander the Great on a new Tetradrachm of Seleucus I, Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau 78, 1999, pp. 27–33, esp. p. 32. Both coin images may refer to a statue of Seleukos (not Alexander) commemorating his successful flight from Antigonos. If this is true, these Seleukid coins would represent the one and only reference to Greek early Hellenistic sculpture within the Seleukid kingdom, possibly erected in Susa or Ekbatana after Seleukos’ return in 312/311 bc. Zervos (1974) pp. 387–388, 396 referring to two doubtful representations of Alexander (?). Compare also Svenson (1995) pp. 109–110 no. 75 pl. 52; Smith (1988) appendix VIII p. 153 no. 4 pl. 70.2. Bieber (1964) p. 53 would accept the possibility of such a prototype in sculpture, as do G.K. Jenkins, A catalogue of the Calouste Gulbenkian Collection of Greek coins II (1989) p. 161 no. 1071; Mørkholm (1991) p. 63; Smith (1988) p. 60. Zervos (1974) p. 385 with n. 1 rightly calls to our attention that the dynastic cult was only inaugurated 311/310 bc, but the coins would demand a statue already in c. 320 bc. Schreiber (1903) p. 168 calls the latter the ‘Idealbild’ of a founder. Only Zervos (1974) p. 396 links it with Lysimachos’ Alexander. Svenson (1995) pp. 74–75 interprets this type as an appreciation of the type with elephant’s scalp. The monument of the founder on horseback, Alexander’s statue in the Tycheion, Alexander Aigiochos, Alexander in a quadriga of elephants, and the Fouquet-type carrying a spear. Compare the overview provided by Stewart (1993) pp. 243–252 esp. p. 252. See Zervos (1974) p. 392. – The same is true of the Seleukid portrait of Alexander wearing an elephant’s scalp, which is clearly derived from the Ptolemaic model. An example of such a failed attempt is A. Rumpf, Ein Kopf im Museum zu Sparta, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung 78, 1963, pp. 176–177, where none of the pieces possesses these alleged attributes. See Smith (1988) p. 40 with n. 72. – Clements of Alexandria, Protreptikos pros Hellenas 4.48, reports around ad 200 Alexander having ordered such portraits of himself with the ram’s horn, but the bishop is possibly wrong in this statement and it may have been inspired by coins instead: compare Stewart (1993) p. 411 T 147. – Alexander, however, actually wears this attribute on reliefs in Egyptian style when depicted as pharaoh in the temple of Ammon in Luxor: Stewart (1993) pp. 174–178, 380–381 S 1 and T 91a–b (with references). See e.g. Bieber (1964) pp. 58–59 without literally calling them models. Ibid. pp. 55–56 fig. 47–49 on a statuette from Priene [Stewart (1993) p. 427 under ‘Magnesia Alexander’ copy c with references]. A head from Copenhagen [Bieber (1964) p. 59 fig. 56; Stewart (1993) p. 424 with references] is instead related to

104

NOTES

16

17

18

19 20

21 22

23

24

the Ptolemaic elephant’s-scalp type by Zervos (1974) pp. 387–388. The statuette from Priene is compared with these Ptolemaic designs by Brown (1995) p. 59. On these attributions and suggestions with justified criticism see Marinescu (1996) p. 34 n. 14. More examples are: Brown (1995) pp. 63–64 on a head in the Prado [Smith (1988) no. 13 pl. 11.3–4]; Schreiber (1903) pp. 159–160 on a bronze bust from Egypt and p. 290 a head from Alexandria [ibid. pl. 2 C]. Moreno (1995) p. 159 fig. 4.19.2 on the head of the Borghese type [ibid. pp. 160–161 fig. 4.19.4]. – Much more cautious is Smith (1988) p. 60, who considers only more generally a derivation from an important piece in sculpture prior to 297 bc (the start of this coinage of Lysimachos) and suggests on p. 62 that the Priene statuette ‘reflects’ the alleged model best. F. Blondé, A. Muller and D. Mulliez, Travaux de l’École Française en Grèce. Thasos, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 109, 1985, pp. 874–881, esp. 878–879 fig. 6; Stewart (1993) pp. 283–284, 420 with references. – Thasos was a member of the Corinthian League, hence there was no need for any personal agenda at this place as Alexander was the head of this organisation. – The head’s published height of 41 cm, however, does not prove colossal size (and consequently use as a cult statue) as it is not clear whether this measurement includes the neck or gives the correct size from the chin to the top of head. Stewart (1993) p. 283 deriving from an original around 320/300 bc and compared to pieces such as the head type Venice/Heyl/Aphrodisias (so-called Ariarathes). For the latter see Smith (1988) pp. 68–69, 158–159 no. 20 A–C pl. 14–15. – Stewart (1993) pp. 283–284 refers to coins from the mint of Lysimacheia, which lies close by. Without a view in profile a judgement remains doubtful. – Marinescu (1996) p. 32 n. 7 against Stewart. Marinescu (1996) pp. 33–34 instead argues for two designs by one engraver each, as already suggested by Cahn (1991) pp. 81–82. – The search for and need to identify this artist with a historical person led to the obvious case of Pyrgoteles: he is an obvious choice indeed, as Pyrgoteles, an engraver in stone, was said to be one of the artists Alexander himself selected as the only one allowed to portray him on gems. Though prominent, none of Pyrgoteles’ works on gems and cameos has survived, and there is no evidence that the model for Lysimachos’ Alexander, which would have been created two decades later, came from his workshop. For Pyrgoteles see Stewart (1993) p. 322 n. 104 with references and more generally. On the ‘edict’: ibid. pp. 360–362, 414 T 52–58, 154. Pyrgoteles: ibid. T 54, 56, 154. – On this type on later gems: ibid. pp. 321–322, 437 fig. 118–119. Zervos (1974) pp. 398–399. We do not know how the body of such a statue would have looked with the head with the ram’s horn of the coins of Lysimachos. Bieber (1964) p. 54 is certain about the existence of such a statue, since contemporary Greek art knew only the full statue, not an abbreviation as a bust or a head. Athenaios 5. 202 a. See Stewart (1993) pp. 252–260, 385 T 96 b. Comparable to the Progonoi of Antiochos I of Kommagene, including Alexander himself, at Nemrud Dag [Stewart (1993) p. 402 T 131], the statues of the Makedonian kings at Dion destroyed in 220 bc [ibid. p. 409 T 144], the ancestors of the Antigonid family at Delos [ibid. p. 410 T 145], and images of Alexander and Poros [ibid. p. 400 T 127]. M.J. Price, Coins of the Macedonians. British Museum Publications (London 1974) p. 33. Compare Bauslaugh (2000) p. 22. – Schreiber (1903) pp. 192–193, too, had used this argument for a monument in sculpture referring to Alexander’s windblown hair on a medallion from Tarsos. See the discussion of the Aesillas-type above. Much too positive is R. Fleischer, True Ancestors and False Ancestors in Hellenistic Rulers’ Portraiture in:

105

NOTES

25

26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

36

37 38 39 40

J.M. Højte (ed.), Images of Ancestors. Aarhus Studies in Mediterranean Antiquity 5, 2002, pp. 59–74. See pp. 67–71 for Alexander. Weiß (1996) p. 162 fig. 12–13 for Prusa ad Olympum, in Kibyra [BMC Phrygia p. 143 no. 69] including a bull’s head and a gate, stressing the importance of this entrance into the city: Weiß (1984) p. 182. Compare the addition of a city-gate on a coin from Aigeai of ad 253/254. See e.g. the statue within the gate in the case of Anchialos in Thrace: F. Münzer and M.L. Strack, Die antiken Münzen von Thrakien. AMNG II 1. G. Reimer. (Berlin 1912) nos. 485. 1; 487; 560; 568; 636; 681.2, 3, 5, 9, 10a. On the existence of such Tycheia see Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 299–300 and ibid. p. 299 n. 66. Weiß (1984) p. 182 n. 15. Compare Recueil I 3 p. 396 n. 6 referring to the coin Recueil I 3 no. 291. A later coin of Severus Alexander from Nikaia shows a different portrait with a much broader physiognomy, reminiscent of contemporary bronze coins of the Makedonian Koinon. Schreiber (1903) pp. 186–187. Stewart (1993) T 120 and T 134 = Plut. De Iside et Osiride 24 (Moralia 360D); Plut. De Alexandri Magni fortuna aut virtute 2.3.1 (Mor. 335 F). Smith (1988) p. 62; Stewart (1993) pp. 161–162. Stewart (1993) pp. 208–209 fig. 70. Gems listed ibid. p. 436. Compare the statue of Alexander as Aniketos Theos in Athens: Stewart (1993) pp. 100, 207–208, 381–382 T 92 = Hypereides, Kata Demosthenous frag. 7. 31–32. Smyrna: Klose (1987) pp. 29–30; H. Brunn in: Kleine Schriften II (Leipzig 1906) p. 197. The two Nemeseis were a very prominent group and easy to recognise. They actually appear on coins featuring the dream of Alexander (the king being asleep himself is an iconographic reference to Ariadne sleeping) as if transferred into this scene: see sole representations of the Nemeseis: Klose (1987) 29 Domitian R 1–3; Trajan R 1–14; Sept. Severus R 3–4; Gordianus R 13 pl. 5, 7, 42, 43, 52. – Their sanctuary was one of the most important of the city: Paus. 4.5.1; Strab. 14.1.37, 646. – In Alexandria in the Troad the reverses do show the archaic statue of Apollo, but the one referring to the founding legend looks as if built from various iconographic elements including the bull’s head and the eagle carrying it. These scenes also follow a chronological sequence of events more suitable for paintings, but not sculpture. In contrast to Stewart (1993) pp. 307–312. – Paintings: M.J. Price, Paintings as a source of inspiration for ancient die engravers in: L. Casson and M.J. Price (eds), Coins, culture, and history in the ancient world. Numismatic and other studies in honor of Bluma L. Trell. Wayne State University Press (Detroit 1981) pp. 69–75. Compare also Stewart (1993) p. 308. Stewart (1993) pp. 310–312 and Moreno (1995) p. 169 relate this coin-type to the six-hundredth anniversary of the conquest of the city in 333 bc and propose such a monument. J. Nollé, Zur Geschichte der Stadt Etenna in Pisidien in: E. Schwertheim (ed.), Forschungen in Pisidien. Asia minor Studien 6 (1992) pp. 61–141 esp. pp. 83–84. Ch. Patin, Imperatorum Romanorum numismata. S. Paulli (Strasbourg 1671) p. 14. Compare H. Gaebler, Zur Münzkunde Makedoniens IV., Zeitschrift für Numismatik 24, 1904, p. 322 and n. 3. See section on this coinage above. The sitting figure of Alexander [AMNG III no. 393 and 393a], here in armour and boots, holds his spear and sword in this peculiar way. The same may be true of another such Alexander on a contorniate in Berlin [Mittag (1999) pl. 15 rev.-die 11; Dressel (1906) pp. 83–85 pl. 3.1], and one more example is represented by

106

NOTES

41 42 43

44

45

46 47 48

49

the decoration of Alexander’s own breast in the case of the gold medallions Dressel M and N with his armoured bust on the obverse. Ziegler (2003) pp. 115–131, esp. pp. 121–122. Ibid. pp. 122–125. Not in armour, but with a himation (coat). Stewart (1993) pp. 334–336, 427 fig. 133 with references. – One more copy possibly from Priene: Ziegler (2003) pp. 121–122; von Graeve (2000) pp. 127–129. – The strange pose of holding one’s weapons upside down may relate to the war won and the peace being secured, a telling type to represent a saviour-king. See G. Hafner, Sieg und Frieden, Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 93, 1978 pp. 228–251, esp. pp. 235–238; Lichtenberger (2003) pp. 72–73. It is also very remarkable that this type is very popular on coins under Caracalla: Ziegler (2003) pp. 123– 125, 128–129. H.R. Baldus, Uranius Antoninus. Münzprägung und Geschichte. Antiquitas 11. R. Habelt Verlag (Bonn 1971) p. 134. – In rare cases Alexander on horseback is actually wearing a helmet [AMNG III 1 no. 729. 5; no. 723 with a shield], but mostly he lacks this attribute, as he does with the obverse bust-types. Which, like the Koinon coins, derives from Lysimachos’ royal coinage and hence does not refer to sculpture. See H. Gaebler, Zur Münzkunde Makedoniens V., Zeitschrift für Numismatik 25, 1906, p. 23; Dressel (1906) p. 21. In contrast to its Hellenistic model, on the examples from the imperial period the ram’s horn is much smaller, the head always raised, Alexander appears more dynamic and his mouth is slightly opened. These uniform characteristics would support a contemporary (i.e. Severan) formation of this particular type, which may have resulted in sculpture and coins showing this now popular variant. It is also possible that the ram’s horn appears as a convenient attribute only in minor arts stressing Alexander’s divine background (coins and gems), while monuments in sculpture would prefer royal, heroic or military types. It must be stressed that these are the only representations of Alexander with such a helmet. This can hardly be an accident. Compare AMNG III 1 no. 764. Similar pieces are nos. 762a–b and 763, but unfortunately no illustration is available. Moreno (1995) p. 64 fig. 4.8.1 suggests a Lysippian model for this scene of Alexander taming Boukephalos, which is only known from Koinon bronzes. For him the composition of this scene resembles a frieze from the Alexander sarcophagus and the portrait of Alexander on coins is allegedly similar to Lysippian works of art. Since examples for this parallel are lacking, it must be considered speculative. The iconographical types used here, however, are familiar from scenes such as Herakles taming the horses of Diomedes e.g. in Herakleia Pontika under Caracalla [W.H. Waddington, E. Babeleon and Th. Reinach, Recueil général des monnaies grecques d’Asie mineure I 2. E. Leroux Éditeur (Paris 1908) p. 366 no. 135 pl. 59.19] and (later) Tranquilina [SNG Aulock no. 338 pl. 13] or Nikaia under Alexander Severus [Recueil I 3 p. 474 no. 595 pl. 82.22]. Not in Rec. Gen. is the coin Triton V, Auction 15–16 January 2002 in New York, p. 138 lot 1711 under Gordianus III, again from Herakleia Pontika. – For this motif compare LIMC V (1990) s. v. Herakles p. 70 no. 2441 a–d (J. Boardman) and H. Voegtli, Bilder der Heldenepen in der kaiserzeitlichen griechischen Münzprägung (Aesch 1977) pp. 33–35 no. 7 b pl. 5 e and g. – Alexander taming Boukephalos e.g. also known from a coin from Heliopolis in Syria, here pl. 25. Bieber (1964) pp. 65, 80 fig. 71–72, 114; Stewart (1993) pp. 332–333, 428 fig. 128–130. – The medallion differs from the head in Pergamon in various details: Alexander’s hair is flying in the wind, the king has whiskers and he is diademed.

107

PLATES

Plate 1 Alexander’s money c. 336–c. 100 bc Alexander adapted the royal Makedonian coinage to meet the needs of his newly acquired empire. He no longer based his silver coinage on the traditional lighter Makedonian standard but opted for the commonly used Attic (Athenian) one instead. During his eleven years of campaigns in Asia his advancing soldiers plundered thousands of tons of gold and silver from the Persian royal treasuries, thus solving Alexander’s financial problems. The booty was converted into coins to pay the soldiers. In the year 331/30 bc alone Alexander seized treasures in Mesopotamia equivalent to c. 180,000 talents (= 4,715 tons, one Attic talent is 26.196 kg) of silver. The obverses of Alexander’s tetradrachms bear the portrait of the divine hero Herakles, the alleged founder of the Makedonian royal house, wearing a lion scalp. The reverse shows the highest god Zeus on a throne with eagle and sceptre. Alexander’s gold staters depict the head of Athena in a Corinthian helmet on the obverse and Nike, the divine messenger of victory, with a wreath and a ship’s mast (stylis) on the reverse. Alexander’s coin images strike a careful balance between Makedonian and Greek themes: Zeus and Herakles were popular deities with all Greeks and the head of Athena is a reference to the Corinthian League over which Alexander officially presided. Nike on the reverse recalls the victory of the Greeks against the Persians at Salamis in 480 bc. Only late in Alexander’s reign does the royal title (Basileus) appear on the reverse legends. It is still debatable whether Alexander issued his new silver coins directly from the beginning of his reign in 336 bc or inaugurated them a few years later around 333 bc when he had successfully consolidated his conquest of Kilikia after the battle of Issos. By ancient standards Alexander’s coinage was the first ‘worldwide’ currency. During his lifetime it was produced by at least 26 mints located all over the empire from Makedonia in the west to Babylon in the east. During 108

P L AT E S

the first years after Alexander’s death his successors continued his coin-types. Several Greek cities followed this example and continued to strike coins of Alexander’s type bearing their own city badges well into the first century bc. Booty finances Alexander’s campaigns They say that, apart from the treasures in Babylon and in the camp . . . the value of those in Susa and Persis alone was reckoned at forty thousand talents, though some say fifty; and others have reported that all treasures from all sources . . . were valued at one hundred and eighty thousand talents. Strabo (64/63 bc–post ad 23), Geography 15.3.9 (translated by H. Leonard Jones. Loeb Classical Library vol. VII (1930)).

1.1–2 Tetradrachm and stater of Alexander III from the ‘Amphipolis’ mint, c. 336–c. 323 bc and c. 330–c. 320 bc.

1.3–4 Tetradrachms from Babylon, c. 325–323 bc, and from Odessos, c. 90–80 bc.

Ref.: Price (1991a) esp. pp. 25–30.

Plate 2 The elephant medallions c. 326/323 bc There is no doubt about the identity of the helmeted warrior on both sides of these otherwise enigmatic ‘medallions’. Armour in Greek style, a crested helmet with two plumes, is characteristic of Alexander’s appearance according to ancient sources (Plut. Alex. 16.7 and 32.8–11) and familiar from 109

P L AT E S

representations of members of the Makedonian nobility. Moreover the battle scene on the obverse with this very warrior attacking a war elephant and its two riders recalls the famous battle at the Hydaspes against Poros in 326 bc and so allows us to identify Alexander himself. It is the first time that Alexander appears on coins and his representation already alludes to his semi-divine character by equipping him with a thunderbolt on the reverse, the attribute of his alleged father, the god Zeus. The battle scene does not depict any historical fight between the two kings, but must be seen as an ideological simplification of the outcome: Alexander and Poros did not meet until the battle had already ended. Thus although the unique scenery explains itself, the background of production, circulation and purpose of these ‘medallions’ is uncertain. In addition to a few pieces known since 1887 when the first one was given to the British Museum, new silver coins of smaller denominations proved the Poros medallions to be part of a whole series. These smaller pieces also show elephants, one of them riderless, and victorious warriors (archer and troops manning horse-chariots) usually identified as Indians. Was the whole series thus a commemorative issue by Alexander himself to be given to his troops after the battle in 326 bc? But why would the Indians be depicted as victorious and why do we not see any Greek troops? Or do we have to place these coins in Mesopotamia as short-lived memorial coins depicting Alexander’s victory against Poros’ elephants combined with warriors in a Persian (not Indian) pictorial tradition? The varying weight of these pieces does not allow us to properly identify the denominational system used (for convenience called dekadrachm/five shekel and tetradrachm/two shekel pieces respectively). They might even originate from a mobile mint moving with the army. But the crude style and fabric hints at Mesopotamia and Baktria, and the same area is indicated by the find-spots. Porus had acquitted himself manfully in the battle . . . only when wounded in the right shoulder did he too at last wheel his elephant round and retreat. Alexander, having seen him play a great and gallant part in the battle, desired to save his life. Arrian (c. ad 95–175), Anabasis 5.18.4–6 (translated by P.A. Brunt. Loeb Classical Library vol. II (1983)).

110

P L AT E S

2.1–2 The so-called ‘Poros’ medallions in London, c. 326/323 bc.

Ref.: Holt (2003).

Plate 3 Alexander in Egypt? Two bronzes c. 330 bc Alexander’s first portrait on coins was only recognised some 20 years ago. A small series of bronze units bear the letters NAY for Naukratis and a female head (a goddess such as Hera or Aphrodite?) on the reverse while the other side shows a young and beardless male with tousled hair accompanied by the legend AΛE. There is not much doubt about the identity of this man as these coins most probably belong to the period between Alexander’s conquest of Egypt in 333 and Ptolemy’s takeover in 322 bc. Another series of fractions (smaller bronze units) were first taken to be satrapal coins from Lampsakos in western Turkey because of the Pegasos emblem on their reverses (this city’s badge). Recent finds of several such coins in the necropolis of Sakkara, however, have proved their Egyptian origin and production in Memphis, the city to which this necropolis belongs. In this case a single letter A appears on the reverse. The obverse again shows the portrait of a young beardless man, though this time he wears a Phrygian-type helmet with curved peak. Such a helmet was worn by Alexander and one might think that the letter on the reverse refers to him. 111

P L AT E S

The Pegasos is best understood as a reference to the Corinthian league in whose name their head Alexander waged war against the Persians. Most probably, these smaller bronzes were issued by Alexander’s representative in Egypt as the king had already left the country in March 331 bc. Either the local satrap Petisis or the Greek Kleomenes, Ptolemy’s predecessor in Egypt, was responsible for the production of these coins, which only circulated locally. The Naukratite coins present Alexander as a young and beardless heroic figure just as he was regarded by the liberated Greeks in Ionia and elsewhere. As the only Greek city and only centre of international trade with Egypt (and, like the Egyptians themselves, happy to get rid of the Persians) Naukratis did well to show its loyalty to the new ruler. The helmeted warrior king of the Memphis bronzes brings us much nearer to Alexander’s most prominent representation during his reign: his military virtues were most probably promulgated by honorary statues erected in his lifetime to commemorate Alexander’s liberation of the eastern Greeks. We also know of another portrait of Alexander wearing a Phrygian helmet, this time represented as a spear-bearing figure on the famous Poros medallions. It seems we would have to identify this type of portrait on the Memphis bronzes as a simplified version of an official representation of Alexander.

3.1 Bronze coin from Naukratis (scale 2:1).

3.2 Bronze fraction from Memphis (scale 2:1).

Ref.: Price (1981) pp. 32–37.

Plate 4 The ‘Elephant Man’ – Ptolemy’s Alexander c. 322–c. 300 bc Shortly after Alexander’s death Ptolemy introduced a new obverse design for the traditional tetradrachms of the Herakles/Zeus-type. From now on they depict the head of the dead king wearing an elephant scalp and hence represent the first official portrait of Alexander on the coins of his successors. The design resembles the dead king’s own coin design of Herakles wearing a lion scalp. 112

P L AT E S

The elephant scalp alludes to Alexander’s victory over King Poros and his war-elephants in northern India in 326 bc. Alexander’s triumphs not only made him the ruler of the world but also elevated him to the divine realm as his deeds paralleled the mythological conquest of the East by the god Dionysos. Ptolemy’s portrait of Alexander contains another reference to the divine nature of the dead king. Underneath the elephant scalp and above Alexander’s ear is visible a ram’s horn, the symbol of the god Zeus Ammon. It refers to Alexander’s visit to the oasis of Siwah in 331 bc, where he had been pronounced the true son of Ammon and future ruler of the world. A few years after its introduction Alexander’s portrait on the Egyptian coinage was slightly modified. A fillet was placed on his head and his hair receded on his forehead. This ornament symbolises both victory and prosperity and is associated with the god Dionysos who wears a similar fillet (Greek mitra), thus again alluding to the conquest of the East. Apart from these changes the two ends of the elephant’s skin around the king’s neck were no longer tied together but turned into a scaly aegis, a mythical goat skin and attribute of Zeus. Finally around 315 bc this modernised obverse design is combined with a new reverse, replacing the familiar seated Zeus, which Alexander had introduced. His place is now taken by the figure of the goddess Athena in full armour, the new badge of Ptolemy’s dynasty. A very exceptional issue of gold staters (we know of only three specimens) of 315–312/310 bc uses the contemporary obverse design but lacks any legend. Their reverses with a ship’s bow (prora) relate to a naval victory. Their rareness assures these gold coins of a very special function, presumably of a victory coinage issued on a special occasion. Possibly Ptolemy’s successes in Cyprus in combination with a campaign of the Ptolemaic fleet may have required such a prestigious coinage and the payment of troops. Another much more extensive series of staters of c. 300 bc from Kyrene and Egypt depicts a nude man with thunderbolt and an aegis-shaped coat riding in a chariot drawn by four elephants. Later references to a statue of Alexander in such a chariot as a part of Ptolemaios II’s great procession in Alexandria may relate to the scene on this coin reverse.

113

P L AT E S

4.1–4 Tetradrachms of c. 321–317 bc, with fillet c. 317 bc and scaly aegis c. 317/316 bc. Combined with new reverse 316/315–c. 301 bc.

4.5 Stater with prora reverse, c. 315–312/310 bc.

4.6–8 Staters, Alexander in quadriga, c. 305–298 bc.

Ref.: Stewart (1993) pp. 435–436 nos. 1–2 and 4.

Plate 5 Ptolemy’s bronzes with Alexander’s portrait c. 316–283 bc Ptolemy’s bronze coinage of c. 316–283 bc (and also the one of his first successors) employed the same image of Alexander with an elephant’s scalp as his contemporary silver coins. However, Ptolemy also made use of a second representation of the dead king. In this case Alexander was shown with 114

P L AT E S

ram’s horn and fillet only, emphasising his connection with Egypt and Zeus Ammon, whereas the elephant scalp with its Eastern connotations was omitted. An early version shows Alexander with short hair, but already with his characteristic anastolé. The fillet again is the Dionysiac mitra and the small ram’s horn clearly stresses his relation with Zeus Ammon. In contrast to the portrait wearing an elephant’s scalp on the silver and some bronze coins this version points to Egypt as the home country of Ammon, in which these bronzes circulated. A younger version of c. 305–283 bc depicts Alexander with much longer hair, though the physiognomy and attributes remained unchanged, and only the reverse legends were updated. Was the short-haired portrait of Alexander (similar to the bronzes from Naukratis, pl. 3) considered to be too unspectacular and hence not appropriate for this guardian of Ptolemy’s new kingship? No doubt the much longer hair makes this Alexander look quite different: he now appears assimilated to the young gods Dionysos or Apollo. This portrait truly carries connotations of a heroic and divine character, leaving the realm of mortals. Thus Alexander’s carefully constructed portraits dominated Egyptian coin obverses for only 20 years. Having proclaimed himself King (of Egypt) in 305 bc, Ptolemy I became the first Hellenistic ruler to place his own portrait on coins. First, Alexander vanished from the silver and gold coins; he was allowed to remain on some bronze coins for a while, though he was heavily outnumbered by the new rulers of Egypt.

5.1–2 Alexander wearing an elephant’s scalp, bronze coins, Ptolemy I, 305–283 bc (l.), and Ptolemaios II, 283–246 bc (r.).

115

P L AT E S

5.3–5 Alexander with short (above l. and r.) and long hair (below), bronze coins c. 316–305 and 305–283 bc, respectively.

Ref.: Stewart (1993) pp. 434–435 nos. 3 and 5.

Plate 6 A voyage to Africa – Agathokles of Syracuse c. 310 bc Agathokles ruled over Syracuse from 316 bc onwards. Only three specimens of this remarkable issue of staters are known, unfortunately all unprovenanced. The legend ‘of Agathokles’ dates these gold coins between 310 bc, until when Agathokles’ coins were labelled ‘of the people of Syracuse’, and c. 304 bc when Agathokles took the title of king. The obverse bears a portrait of Alexander wearing an elephant’s scalp with a scaly aegis. It is obviously modelled on the contemporary representation of Alexander on the coins of Ptolemy. The reverse also quotes Ptolemy’s design, but additionally equips the striding Athena with wings and an owl instead of the Ptolemaic eagle. They best fit into the historical situation of Agathokles’ daring invasion of Africa in 310–307 bc. To counter the siege of Syracuse by the Carthaginians he attacked his foe’s capital instead. Boosting the morale of his mercenary troops, Agathokles reportedly managed to receive divine support. Whatever truth lies in this omen, his army actually did overcome the powerful Punic army and Agathokles laid siege to Carthage itself. In the meantime Syracuse was close to surrender to the Carthaginians and only the report of his unexpected victory inspired the exhausted defenders and finally allowed them to force the Carthaginians to withdraw. It has now been proved that these characteristic staters were not produced in Africa but in Syracuse as a victory issue, commemorating this military coup. Alexander now becomes an overwhelming icon of victory and military virtue freed from his earlier geographical associations. Alexander and Agathokles are presented as two of a kind (Plautus, Mostellaria 775–776). The winged Athena on the reverse is rightly characterised as a bringer of victory, while her own companion, the 116

P L AT E S

owl, reminds us of the remarkable episode before the decisive battle. Less glorious, however, was the outcome of Agathokles’ African campaign: he was not able to take Carthage and in 308 bc revolts in Sicily forced him back. Again personally taking command in 307 bc, Agathokles finally abandoned his troops in November. He remained in power in Syracuse until his death in 289 bc. Seeing that his soldiers were frightened by the great numbers of barbarian cavalry and infantry, he let loose into the army in many places owls, which he had long since prepared as a means of relieving the discouragement of the common soldiers. The owls, flying through the phalanx and settling on the shields and helmets, encouraged the soldiers, each man regarding this as an omen because the bird is held sacred to Athena . . . and word was passed along that the deity was clearly foretelling victory for them . . . Diodorus of Sicily (c. 80–20 bc), Library of History 20.11.3–5, (translated by Russell M. Geer. Loeb Classical Library vol. X (1954)).

6 Stater in the name of Agathokles of Syracuse, c. 310 bc. Alexander and Athena.

Ref.: Stewart (1993) pp. 266–269.

Plate 7 Alexander and victory – The case of Seleukos I c. 300–298 bc Seleukos I also made use of Alexander’s portrait. In his case, however, the king plays only a minor role in Seleukos’ coinage. Alexander appears on the coins of Seleukos only for a short period of time. A few bronze issues and gold double and single darics from Ekbatana, Susa and Babylon feature Alexander’s portrait, again wearing an elephant’s scalp. While the design of the scalp and aegis resembles Ptolemy’s invention, a number of iconographic details clearly differ from this earlier model. Seleukos’ Alexander wears neither a fillet nor the horns of Zeus Ammon. Both attributes may have been considered to be too strong a reference to Egypt and Ptolemy himself, an iconographic relation not fitting to the political rivalry between the two powers. 117

P L AT E S

In the case of Seleukos, Alexander’s portrait is thus best understood as an icon of victory and an example of the fitting use of Alexander as a predecessor and divine guardian. Following Alexander’s path into India, Seleukos conducted a campaign to the Indus in direct imitation of Alexander’s Anabasis; this time the elephant’s scalp also relates to the East. Although Seleukos did not manage to conquer this region permanently, his treaty with the Mauryan king Chandragupta in c. 305 bc supplied him with 500 elephants. Either the fifth anniversary of this event and Seleukos taking the royal title or the remarkable defeat of Antigonos the One-eyed at Ipsos in 301 bc against the coalition of Alexander’s remaining successors formed the background for producing these coins. The reverses again stress the character of a victory issue as Nike is crowning a prominent Seleukid badge, the head of a horse. The use of a local weight standard of darics, not Attic staters, also points to the Seleukid heartland in Mesopotamia. The extraordinary character of the rare gold coins may also explain why Alexander’s physiognomy is by no means uniform but changes according to the dies used. There was obviously neither intention nor time to create any uniformity within this small issue. He [Seleukos] added that they ought also to believe the oracles of the gods which had foretold that the end of this campaign would be worthy of his purpose; for, when he had consulted the oracle in Branchidae, the god had greeted him as King Seleukos, and Alexander standing beside him in a dream had given him a clear sign of the future leadership that was destined to fall to him in the course of time. Diodorus of Sicily (c. 80–20 bc), Library of History 19.90.4, (translated by Russell M. Geer. Loeb Classical Library vol. X (1954)).

7.1–2 Double darics from Ekbatana, c. 300–298 bc.

7.3 Bronze unit from Ekbatana, c. 300–298 bc.

Ref.: SC I pp. 6–7. 118

P L AT E S

Plate 8 Lysimachos – Alexander Invincible Coins from c. 297–281 bc and later Lysimachos of Thrace was another of Alexander’s generals. Having declared himself king in 305/304 bc, he did not use his own portrait on his coinage as Ptolemy had done before. He introduced a new and powerful image of Alexander the Great. On these coins Alexander is wearing a royal diadem. He is shown with strong and elaborated facial features, thus conveying notions of dynamism. Like the Egyptian coins of Ptolemy, those of Lysimachos depict Alexander with the ram’s horn of Zeus Ammon. At this point the horn had lost its specific Egyptian connotations and had become a symbol of divine descent and promise of universal hegemony instead. It is tempting to see this image as Lysimachos’ (his name means ‘the one to end strife’) own claim to end all wars and rule the world. He thus used the portrait of Alexander to project his own, though regionally restricted, ambitions. In 281 bc Lysimachos, now more than 80 years of age, fell during a battle against his enemy Seleukos I. His imaginative portrait of Alexander, however, continued to be used well into the late second and early first centuries bc by several cities in the Black Sea region. There were two reasons for this development. First, the gold and silver content of Lysimachos’ original coins had been high and the use of the same designs inspired confidence. Second, Alexander’s image was a neutral coin design during a period of rapid political change. Alexander and the Oracle at Siwah . . . as the king drew near, the eldest of the priests called him son, declaring that his father Jupiter [i.e. Zeus] gave him that name . . . He [Alexander] then asked whether the rule of the world was destined for him by the fates. The prophet, equally disposed to flattery, answered that he would be the ruler of all land . . . he added that Alexander would be invincible till he departed to join the gods. Quintus Curtius (first century ad), The History of Alexander 4.7.25–27 (translated by J.C. Rolfe. Loeb Classical Library vol. I (1946)).

119

P L AT E S

8.1–2 Tetradrachms from Lampsakos (note different shape of horns), 297–281 bc.

8.3–4 Stater from Pella, c. 286–281 bc. Posthumous tetradrachm from Byzantium, c. 195–150 bc.

Ref.: Stewart (1993) pp. 318–321; Thompson (1968) pp. 163–182.

Plate 9 Agathokles of Baktria c. 190–170 bc In far-away Baktria, King Agathokles remodelled Alexander’s own coins as a part of a remarkable series of coins emphasising his claim to the throne. Caught in a struggle against the usurper Eukratides in the late 170s bc, Agathokles put his fate into the hands of his royal predecessors. He issued tetradrachms bearing the portraits of the Seleukid king Antiochos I Nikator, the Baktrian rulers Diodotos Soter and Theos, Euthydemos Theos, Demetrios Aniketos and Pantaleon, all given a personal cult epithet. The reverses also each recall characteristic coin-types of these former kings. The head of these pedigree coins is taken by Alexander himself, named ‘Son of Philip’ on 120

P L AT E S

the obverse. The image on this tetradrachm is taken from the silver coins issued in Alexander’s lifetime: the hero Herakles wearing a lion’s scalp. This case provides for the first time evidence that Herakles and Alexander could be represented in an identical way. For the contemporary onlooker presumably as early as the third century bc onwards, we must think, this unbearded Herakles on Alexander’s royal money was thought to be a portrait of Alexander himself. The stylistic rendering of Alexander’s physiognomy clearly contrasts with the idealistic and severe features of Hercules in the coins issued during Alexander’s lifetime. Agathokles’ Herakles/Alexander derives from contemporary second-century coins issued after Alexander’s death. The head is transformed according to the baroque taste of this period and presents itself with a romantic physiognomy and broad facial structures. This shows not only a change in matters of style during the 140 years after Alexander’s death, but also the demand for much more expressive representations, fitting the depiction of a dynamic and powerful ruler. The reverse consequently shows Zeus sitting on his throne (an image well known from Alexander’s money). Here, however, the legend bears the extraordinary formula ‘in the reign of Agathokles the Just’. This is remarkable for two reasons. First, Agathokles used an adjective to describe himself. Second, he avoided using the usual royal title (‘of the king’). These pedigree coins hence bear witness not only to the creation of a dynastic ruler cult under Agathokles (possibly in collaboration with his ally Antimachos, who issued another series of pedigree coins), but also to an urgent need for legitimacy. There was no better candidate than Alexander for that purpose. However, this innovative ideological programme witnessed through these coins failed their inventors. Eukratides finally won the struggle, and, imitating Alexander, he took an appropriate title: ‘The Great’.

9 Tetradrachm of Agathokles, c. 190–170 bc.

Ref.: Stewart (1993) p. 326.

121

P L AT E S

Plate 10 Aesillas’ Roman Alexander c. 90–70 bc In Makedonia Alexander played the role of an important ‘national’ hero long after his death – and even after the country had become a Roman province in 148 bc. A Roman magistrate called Aesillas placed the head of Alexander on the obverse of Makedonia’s tetradrachms in c. 90 bc. The king was depicted with the distinctive ram’s horn but without a royal diadem. The portrait was accompanied by the legend ‘of the Makedonians’. The reverse, by contrast, referred to the Roman official. The most common legend gives his name and title as ‘Aesillas Quaestor’, i.e. the finance officer responsible for issuing these coins. The reverse image shows the Quaestor’s chair and chest as well as Herakles’ club, the latter again a familiar element in Makedonian coinage. Much scarcer are coins which bear the name of a Sura legatus pro questore and a ‘CAE PR’. One particular iconographic feature is quite telling: Makedonia now being a Roman province, Roman authorities left out the king’s usual attribute, the royal diadem. Though they intended to make good use of Alexander’s legend, they did not want the dead king to be turned into a potential tool of Makedonian desire for independence. The horns of Zeus Ammon conveniently remain to make sure he stays in the realm of the divine. This particular coinage was mainly used to finance Rome’s war against King Mithradates VI of Pontos following his invasion of Makedonia in 88 bc. While there is no historical record for Aesillas, Sura has been identified with Q. Braetius Sura, a legate of the Roman governor Gaius Sentius during the Mithradatic invasion, who successfully fought Mithradates’ general Archelaos and drove him out of the country in 87 bc. The meaning of CAE PR is debatable. Hoard evidence places these coins (mostly four-drachm pieces though a few drachms were also produced) within a period of c. 20 years, though they might have been taken out of circulation as early as 75 bc. It had earlier been thought that these coins were used to pay auxiliary troops from Makedonia fighting Mithradates. But as they are mainly found in Bulgarian hoards and not in Greece, they most probably represent tributes paid to Thracian tribes in the north, to keep them from threatening the sensitive border in the north, through which Roman troops were marched to be ferried across the northern Aegean and enter Asia. Alexander’s portrait thus was chosen by Roman officials simply to appeal to the national pride of the contemporary Makedonians. Hence Rome enlisted – symbolically speaking – the great conqueror of the East, from where now Mithradates was attacking, for their own interests.

122

P L AT E S

10.1–2 Tetradrachms in the name of Aesillas.

Ref.: R.A. Bauslaugh, Silver coinage with the types of Aesillas the Quaestor. ANS Numismatic Studies 22 (New York 2000).

Plate 11 Alexandria kat’Isson Second century bc to third century ad Together with Aigeai, this city is one of the centres for the veneration of Alexander in Kilikia. Alexandria owes its name to the king, who fought one of his battles in nearby Issos, and, in contrast to Aigeai, there is literary evidence from the late Hellenistic period onwards, claiming Alexander as its ktistes (founder). The city possibly even at one point had an official seal in use by its magistrates, which showed a representation of Alexander as Herakles. But in contrast to this quite impressive record, Alexandria was founded later, most probably either by Antigonos the One-eyed or by Seleukos I. In the second and first centuries bc civic coins show the familiar head of Herakles with the lion’s scalp quoting coins issued during Alexander’s lifetime but do not give any proper identification. It is much later in ad 43/44 that Alexander again appears in Alexandria, this time his diademed portrait head. This version may have been inspired by one issued by neighbouring Aigeai only a few years earlier. A similar head is for a second time used under Alexander Severus (no illustration), perhaps as a consequence of imperial veneration of Alexander by the Severan dynasty. This issue of ad 43/44 also includes coins with the Herakles type. It thus seems sensible to interpret these coins as part of a whole series which was distributed to highlight Alexandria’s claim as the first and oldest city in Kilikia, and defend it 123

P L AT E S

especially against Aigeai. Hence civic money closely reflects the rivalry between various cities in a region. In the second and third centuries ad a scenic representation was also issued. Under Trajan and Caracalla, both with a record of being fond of Alexander, a male figure with drapery is shown. The figure holds a sceptre in one hand and pours wine from a vessel with the other, performing a sacrifice. Although there is no direct mention of Alexander, the iconographic type employed is the traditional one of the founder of a city. There is no question about whom these reverse-scenes relate to. Alexandria kat’Isson thus issued various types of representations of Alexander throughout its history. Like several other civic coinages, these were issued only at certain peaks, and hardly at a constant level. Money was only produced if there was economic need and financial profit ahead.

11.1 Herakles-type, second and first centuries bc.

11.2 Diademed head, ad 43/44.

11.3 Founder figure, ad 113/114.

11.4 Ditto, ad 215/216.

Ref.: Levante (1971) pp. 93–102.

Plate 12 Aigeai in Kilikia First to third centuries ad Cities organised along the lines of self-governing Greek city-states began to employ the image of Alexander on their coins as early as the second century bc. Normally, civic bronze coinage during the Hellenistic and Roman periods depicted famous gods and goddesses and prominent monuments and temples as an expression of local pride. A number of cities also claimed to be the oldest, most famous or most important city in their region. In this climate the concept of Eugeneia, being of noble descent, played an important 124

P L AT E S

part. Consequently, many cities regarded themselves as foundations of Alexander the Great himself, even if, in reality, they had already existed before or were founded by one of his successors. In the Roman period especially, many of these cities displayed representations of Alexander or images related to him. Cities in Kilikia, where Alexander had won a decisive battle against Dareios near Issos in 333 bc, were the first to depict Alexander on their civic coins. Aigeai, for example, did this over a period of nearly 300 years. Its name not only recalled its elder twin city in Makedonia, but also the imaginative legend described below. It also bears from Caracalla onwards among others the honorary titles ‘Makedonike’, ‘Eugenes’ and finally ‘Alexandroupolis’ in ad 228/229. Aigeai introduces the image of the young, beardless and diademed king (lacking any divine attributes) into the numismatic world, employing such representations in the first, second and third centuries ad. Under Macrinus (reigned ad 217–218) especially a whole series of coins combining the emperor, his son and Alexander shows a renewed interest in the great king. The individual portraits of Alexander, while following the same general type, clearly do not derive from a shared statuary prototype because the stylistic rendering of hair and physiognomy is very different in each case. They are thus fictional derivations of ideal Alexanders. Interestingly enough, it is as late as ad 217/218 that the familiar Herakles type with lion’s scalp also reappears in Aigeai, now in a late Hellenistic transformation with broader features. A (fictitious) letter of Alexander Alexander wrote to his mother: . . . ‘I must tell you about my battle against Dareios. I had heard that he and many kings were assembling their troops at the Gulf of Issos. Hence I took a number of goats, fixed torches between their horns and moved forward during the night. As the Persians saw the torch lights, they thought our advancing troops were of considerable size. They became frightened and were beaten. Thus I won the battle and founded a city on this spot and called it “Aigeai” [city of goats] . . .’ The Alexander Romance 23 (third century ad).

125

P L AT E S

12.1 Under Hadrian with Alexander’s portrait, below goat, ad 117/118.

12.2 Under Diadumenian with Heraklestype portrait, ad 217/218.

12.3 Ditto. With head of Alexander. ad 217/218.

12.4 Ditto. Reverse showing goat with torches, ad 217/218.

Ref.: Ziegler (1998) pp. 679–697.

Plate 13 Nikaia in Bithynia c. ad 181–184 and ad 222–235 Nikaia and its rival Nikomedia (one of the most important cities in Roman Bithynia) had no historical record of a relation to Alexander. Yet the city followed the cultural climate of its time in venerating founder figures and commemorating its own history and origins. And though Nikaia claimed to derive from a foundation by Dionysos and Herakles, some coins (possibly of the early 180s ad) feature Alexander the Great. Combined with the portraits of M. Aurelius (?) and Commodus on the obverse, the city issued a quite uniform series of Alexander representations in the transitional phase of these two emperors. One type shows the head of Alexander with the royal diadem, with legend either ‘of the citizens of Nikaia’ or more detailed ‘The people of Nikaia [honour] Alexander’. The latter form is quite exceptional and gives testimony to an official act by the magistrates of Nikaia. A motion was probably passed by the city’s council (boulé) asking for some kind of act in honour of Alexander. The second type, which also carries this legend, may provide an insight into the character of this act: it shows the naked figure of Alexander (conveniently identified by this legend) in the form of a counterpoised sculptural type. Alexander holds a 126

P L AT E S

thunderbolt (?) in his right hand and leans on a sceptre with his left. His head is turned to the right. This figure may thus represent a statue of Alexander, erected in Nikaia shortly before c. ad 184. The type of this statue is reminiscent of the famous painting of Alexander with a thunderbolt by Apelles, which was shown in Ephesos. It combines the thunderbolt as the attribute of Zeus with a heroic setting, lacking the military components of the famous representation on the so-called Poros medallions. Maybe Commodus’ support for Nikaia after the city was struck by an earthquake made the authorities feel the need to flatter the young emperor by creating some kind of relation with Alexander. Nikaia may also have profited from its rival’s Nikomedia losing imperial trust and privileges with the downfall of Commodus’ favourite Saoteros, a Nikomedian, who lost grace in ad 182. Nikaia was quick in gaining the first rank among Bithynian cities at this time. It is only as late as ad 222–235 that one single coin of Nikaia again depicts Alexander. Here it is the diademed head of the young king. This time, under an emperor who greatly favoured Alexander’s memory, it looks quite similar to contemporary portraits on coins of the Makedonian League.

13.1–2 Head of Alexander, c. ad 161–184.

13.3 Alexander with thunderbolt and spear, c. ad 181–c. 184.

13.4 Head of Alexander, ad 222–235.

Ref.: Schreiber (1903) pp. 186–187.

Plate 14 Alexandria in the Troad Coins from ad 161–260 The city of Alexandria, just a few miles south of Troy (Ilion), was founded by Antigonos the One-eyed, one of Alexander’s former generals, in c. 310 bc under the name of Antigoneia. Lysimachos, when taking over western Asia Minor around 290 bc, renamed it Alexandria. Under Augustus the city 127

P L AT E S

gained the rank of a Roman colony, thus using Latin legends on its bronze coins. In the middle of the second century ad, a period of greater awareness of local history, Alexandria began to issue coins relating to its foundation. Like almost all other cities, it preferred not to stress its real historical founders, Alexander’s generals, but claimed the more prestigious Great king himself as ktistes (Greek ‘founder’). Alexandria’s coins feature two scenes of its foundation legend: first, Alexander rides towards the statue of Apollo Smintheus (‘the mouse eater’), greeting the city’s tutelary deity on his arrival in Asia. Second, he then offers a sacrifice to the god and receives in return the omen from Apollo to found a new city: an eagle carrying a bull’s head leads Alexander to the place where the new city will be situated. It would be difficult to identify Alexander on these coins without any further evidence, but an ancient rhetorical treatise used by professional orators specialising in city praise conveniently explains these images. Instructions on how to praise Alexandria in the Troad And thus Alexander, after subduing Europe and crossing to Asia came to the temple and to the site – whereupon he observed the signs for establishing the city, for the god revealed them; and he established this blessed town, consecrating it to Apollo Sminthius. . . . Menander Rhetor, Treatise 2.444.3–9 (third century ad) (D.A. Russell and N.G. Wilson (eds and transls), Menander Rhetor. Oxford University Press (Oxford 1981)).

14.1 Alexander on horse greeting Apollo, obv. Commodus.

14.2 The king performing sacrifice, obv. Crispina.

14.3 Ditto. Obv. Caracalla.

Ref.: Weiß (1996) pp. 157–173. 128

P L AT E S

Plate 15 Smyrna in Ionia Coins of c. ad 147 and 242/244–249 In Smyrna a remarkable depiction illuminates this city’s very own interpretation of its past. A very elaborate and unique iconography is implied. Three of Smyrna’s magistrates subsequently made use of a transformation of Alexander into the city’s history. Fortunately the famous writer Pausanias gives a full report of this local founding story and indirectly explains the scene depicted on these coins. In his report he tells us that Alexander once had a vision while sleeping at the Sanctuary of the Nemeseis and in his dream was told to found the new city. Looking at the coins, we find every detail mentioned in this story. The Nemeseis, a twin version of the goddess, were very characteristic of Smyrna and they frequently appear on its civic coins. The Nemeseis in Alexander’s vision seem to have been taken from these coins and may represent an echo of a statue group of these goddesses erected in Smyrna. It its also very likely that the whole reverse scene itself copies another group of statues or a painting in a public building. Blending Alexander into Smyrna’s founding story is quite remarkable as it is quite close to being historically accurate. The first city prospered from the tenth century bc onwards, but was destroyed by the Lydian King Alyattes around 600 bc. For the next 300 years the inhabitants settled in a number of small rural villages and it was either Lysimachos or Antigonos who finally reorganised the New Smyrna (Strabo 14.1.31). It is possible to empathise with the magistrates responsible for issuing these coins for preferring an even more fascinating figure. We do not know of any special occasion in Smyrna’s history which may have led to the representation of Alexander’s dream in the Roman period. Hence the most likely reason is a general desire to commemorate the city’s pedigree and profit from Alexander’s legend, when many cities in Roman Asia did the same. The modern city was founded by Alexander, the son of Philip, in accordance with a vision in a dream. It is said that Alexander was hunting on Mount Pagus, and that after the hunt was over he came to a sanctuary of the Nemeses, and found there a spring and a plane-tree in front of the sanctuary, growing over the water. While he slept under the plane-tree it is said that the Nemeses appeared and bade him found a city there and to remove into it the Symrnaeans from the old city. Pausanias (second century ad), Description of Greece 7.5.2 (translated by W.H.S. Jones. Loeb Classical Library vol. III (1933)).

129

P L AT E S

15 Bronze coin in the name of the Magistrate Aph . . . Epiktetos under Philip the Arab, ad 244–249.

Ref.: D.O.A. Klose, Die Münzprägung von Smyrna in der römischen Kaiserzeit. AMuGS X (Berlin 1987) pp. 36, 257–258, 308, 313.

Plate 16 Kapitolias in Syria Palaestina ad 189/191 and 204/206 Among the four cities of the former Dekapolis, now forming the Roman provinces of Arabia and Syria Palaestina, which are known for local Alexander traditions, only Kapitolias and Gerasa issued coins with representations of Alexander. In Kapitolias Alexander appears twice in a representation that is extraordinary in terms of iconography and legend, first under Commodus and later combined with a portrait of Geta. In both cases the reverse images are identical. The legend refers to Alexander who is called a Makedonian and progenitor of the city, thus stressing the eugeneia (noble descent) of Kapitolias and most importantly naming the king. The term genarches (progenitor) is used instead of the more common ktistes (founder). Of course Kapitolias, like its neighbours, was in fact never visited by Alexander, but was a Hellenistic foundation. Alexander’s portrait does not help us in identifying certain physiognomic features. His portrait as a whole, although lacking the now common diadem, still offers a telling insight into the transformation of the king in an Eastern cultural context. Alexander wears heavily ornamented drapery, indicating a careful decoration of the coat with embroidery and colours. This has been interpreted as the royal garments of the Persian Great king, whose costume Alexander (in our case) posthumously would have taken over. But there is also another explanation. It may originate from a consensus as to how contemporaries felt a king should be represented. Another successor of the Persian empire, the Parthian king, wears a similar coat. One may assume that important centres of trade in this region, such as Palmyra, influenced such appreciation and models of ruler-portraits originating from the East. Hence 130

P L AT E S

Kapitolias offers an example of blending different cultural traditions, Greek and oriental, in a regional setting within the Roman empire. It is also significant that the magistrates issued these coins again a few years later and chose a portrait that does without the usual diadem. Combined this time with a portrait of the prince Geta on the obverse, this representation of Alexander on a reverse is resumed around ad 205. Also remarkable is the fruitful combination of claiming Greek descent while using an oriental iconography and a title for Alexander, which is unique in the ancient world. For another coin presumably of Kapitolias and Abila see plate 18.

16 Bronze coin under Commodus, c. ad 189/191.

Ref.: Spijkerman (1978) pp. 102–105 nos. 15 and 20.

Plate 17 Gerasa in Arabia ad 193–211, 211–217, 218–222 On first sight the types on coins of Gerasa issued under the Severan dynasty between Septimius Severus and Elagabalus are much more conventional. Here Alexander is always depicted as a young beardless king wearing a royal diadem familiar on Roman provincial coins at least from the first century ad onwards. Interestingly enough, the city of Gerasa used two names on its coins. On those with Alexander (except under Elagabalus, where no city name appears) it is called Gerasa, a Greek derivation of a native place name. This relates to the legend that the city’s name derives from the fact that old men (gerontes), meaning veterans of Alexander’s army, established a colony at this place. Other coins, e.g. in the second century ad (without any representation of Alexander), call it by its dynastic name of Antioch on the (river) Chrysoroas, thus stressing its re-foundation through the Seleukid Antiochos III after his conquest of this region from the Ptolemies around 200 bc. Therefore, the choice of legend and reverse type supplied quite different messages and perspectives on the city’s history. The coin legends before ad 218 featuring Alexander, explicitly refer to him as the ‘Makedon’ and ‘founder’ (ktistes) of the city, but later issues under 131

P L AT E S

Elagabalus stress only his Makedonian origin, further claiming the noble descent of its inhabitants through their alleged Greek ancestors. These later coins also seem to indicate some kind of assimilation between the portrait of the emperor and Alexander, though any intention to do so remains uncertain. Using a portrait of Alexander only during the reign of emperors of the Severan family allows the citizens and authorities to associate themselves with the renewed veneration of Alexander by these rulers, especially the notorious Caracalla. The authorities in Gerasa knew very well how to react to their ruler’s preferences.

17 Bronze coin under Caracalla, ad 211–217 (or earlier?).

Ref.: Spijkerman (1978) pp. 164–167 nos. 29, 31, 34–35.

Plate 18 Abila and Kapitolias in Syria Palaestina Coins of ad 197/198–209 There is good reason to attribute this remarkable though unlabelled coin type from Roman Arabia to the cities of Abila and Kapitolias. The two warriors shaking hands are clearly identified through the legend, which gives their names as ‘Alexandros’, left, and ‘Seleukos’ on the right. Both hold a spear in their hands and wear full body armour. Their heads are adorned with a diadem indicating their royal rank. The dextrarum iunctio, a gesture of unity and concord, is characteristic of coins depicting the official homonoia between cities, an official contract in which they accepted each other’s privileges and status. Each city is represented by its founder. As Alexander and Seleukos are involved, there is only one combination fitting to this scheme: Kapitolias, prominent for its veneration of Alexander, and its neighbour Abila, which claimed the Syrian king Seleukos as its founder. Sources even allow us to identify two Seleukid rulers, who were involved: the actual founder of Abila was Seleukos IV (reigned 187–175 bc), who for matters of prominence was later replaced by his ancestor, the much more famous Seleukos I (died 280 bc), one of Alexander’s lieutenants. So far there are only three known specimens of this single type, indicating a very short period of minting, presumably on a single occasion. But though rare, these bronzes bear witness to the mentality and identity of the citizens of the two cities. Both cared greatly about their place in history and the 132

P L AT E S

prominence and status of their municipality. Being able to look back in history and so become aware of the past greatly influenced their assessment of the present. To agree officially with their respective neighbour on status and privileges, which were vital whenever cities dealt with each other, was a good reason for public festivities and an issue of this coin commemorating this event. The portrait of the prince Geta on the obverse dates this coin to around ad 197/198–209, when he held this rank before becoming Augustus (only to be murdered two years later). One could expect that currently unknown specimens with obverses of his father and mother Septimius Severus and Iulia Domna, or his brother Caracalla, might come to light linking the loyalty of the citizens involved to the whole of the Severan family. There are contemporary coins from Abila whose images are related to Seleukos, and in Kapitolias Alexander does appear on coins from the Antonine period and from ad 204/206.

18 Bronze coin attributed to Abila and Kapitolias, ad 197/198–209.

Ref.: Leschhorn (1991) pp. 448–449 pl. 4.3.

Plate 19 Apollonia Mordiaion in Pisidia Coins of c. ad 198–209 It is no surprise to find in Apollonia Mordiaion yet another city working on its own past and imagining its alleged dedication by the famous conqueror. Though Alexander indeed passed through Pisidia in 333 bc (see plate 24) there is no evidence that he left a garrison at this place or even installed any settlement of veterans at Apollonia. But 500 years later and as the first city in Roman Pisidia to do so, Apollonia issued a series of coins combining one particular obverse type with several different reverses. Here Alexander appears, just as he did on coins of Agathokles of Baktria (plate 9) and Kilikia (plates 11, 12), in disguise: again Alexander’s own coin-type originally depicting Herakles wearing a lion’s scalp is used to portray the king, thus posthumously blending divine hero and king. In contrast to the case of the Baktrian coins the Herakles type at Apollonia is directly copied from coins issued during Alexander’s lifetime. The characteristic style, lacking any exaggerated longish and broad features, rules out the possibility that a middle or late Hellenistic prototype from some civic money had been used. The legend makes it very clear who is 133

P L AT E S

depicted. ‘Alexander the founder of the city of the Apollonians’ pays tribute to the king and the self-esteem of the city. The representations of the six reverses matching this Alexander-obverse put this claim into a much broader context: the one showing the local river god Hippophoras reclining with a cornucopia, reed and a vase out of which water flows, is quite conventional. However, the second depicts the personification of Apollonia next to that of the neighbouring region of Lykia. The legend in this case even includes the term homonoia (concord), thus referring to an official agreement between the two partners. Other types give evidence of similar contracts with Ilion (Troy) and Perge. Dealing with these cities, Apollonia needed some kind of hero or founder prominent enough to rival the ones of much older and more important cities. It seems that Alexander came in very useful, especially as no other city in Pisidia had yet claimed him for their own purposes. Since there is no chronological hint in the form of an emperor’s portrait or a civic era, the date of these coins depends upon its setting within the civic money of Apollonia. There is good reason to place this issue in the joint reign of Caracalla and Septimius Severus, the first well known and by then already notorious for his own veneration of the king.

19.1 With the river god Hippophoras on the reverse.

19.2 On the occasion of homonoia with Lykia.

Ref.: Rebuffat (1986) pp. 65–71.

134

P L AT E S

Plate 20 Caesarea ad Libanum in Phoenikia Coins of ad 219–222 The Vita of the emperor Severus Alexander connects the birth and conception of the emperor with Alexander. During a festival in honour of Alexander the emperor’s mother allegedly gave birth in the local temple. And his birthday is, according to the Historia Augusta, the same day Alexander III departed this life. The latter is without any doubt wrong (Severus Alexander was actually born on the first day of October ad 208, not in July like Alexander). The place of his birth, though, may have been Caesarea and there is some possibility that a festival such as the one described in our sources may actually have taken place during the third century ad. The story told in Severus Alexander’s biography presents itself as one of a number of reports attempting to explain the emperor’s veneration of Alexander and is written after the event. There is no further detail known of the character of this feast in Caesarea and nothing about a local founder story, but a number of coins may relate to a contemporary construction of an Alexander tradition. The emperor Elagabalus – himself inheriting the tradition from Caracalla and thus through family ties keen on imitating Alexander – took Severus Alexander as a co-regent. Some reverses of Elagabalus and Severus Alexander as Caesar depict a temple and within its architectural frame Tyche, the civic goddess of this city. To her left a draped figure crowns this Tyche with a wreath in its right hand. This iconographic composition may relate to the figure of the founder (in our case Alexander) who honours his newly established settlement. He was given the name Alexander because he was born in a temple dedicated to Alexander the Great in the city of Arca, whither his father and mother had chanced to go on the feast-day of Alexander for the purpose of attending the sacred festival. Scriptores Historiae Augustae, The life of Severus Alexander 5.1. Compare 13.1 (fourth century ad) (translated by D. Magie. Loeb Classical Library vol. III (1924)).

20 Alexander (?), r., crowns the Tyche of Caesarea. Under Elagabalus, ad 219/220.

Ref.: Leschhorn (1991) p. 449 pl. 4.5.

135

P L AT E S

Plate 21 Makedonian Koinon (1) obverses Coins of ad 218–249 Numerous representations of Alexander appear on the provincial coinage of Makedonia from the reign of emperor Elagabalus (ad 218–222) onwards until the reign of Philip the Arab (ad 244–249). The provincial coinage inaugurated in the first century ad already featured the portrait of the emperor. After ad 218 the imperial likeness becomes extremely rare, while Alexander takes its place. Obverses tend to show Alexander’s head or bust in several variations, while coin reverses often depict stories relating to Alexander. Here we witness a whole cosmos of Alexanders. His diademed head with hair waving in the wind or falling onto his neck is very common as is the one with an Attic helmet, while armoured busts are less frequent. Even a few coins with the ram’s horn of Zeus Ammon Alexander are known, and some others depict Alexander wearing a lion’s scalp. What becomes very obvious is that representations of the king Alexander were much more popular than those visualising his superhuman character through divine attributes. The background for the production of these coins is a festival which was established under Elagabalus. It combined the traditional cult of the ruling emperor with games in honour of Alexander the Great. Some of the games were actually called ‘Alexandreia’. They centred on the provincial administrative capital of Beroia. From inscriptions we know that these annual feasts included gymnastic and musical competitions plus horse-races and gladiators. The games attracted visitors, professional athletes and merchants from Makedonia and beyond. These games became an event of great economic importance, and perhaps this was the reason for the large number of coin designs relating to them. Fewer coins were issued in the name of Beroia alone. Games, coins and inscriptions give testimony to Alexander’s growing popularity in the third century ad, celebrating the memory of Makedonia’s greatest son, Alexander. It is no surprise to see Elagabalus introducing these coins and presumably starting these festivals, while Severus Alexander continued supporting them. The feast was additionally made isolympic, meaning that its procedures, fame and most of all the prizes for the participating athletes were comparable to those of the more famous games at the sanctuary of Zeus in Olympia. These Alexandreia Olympia took place every four years starting in ad 242/43 and a second time in ad 246/47.

136

P L AT E S

21.1–3 Diademed head of Alexander to r. and l. with flying hair, and to r. with long hair.

21.4–7 Head with Attic helmet and armoured busts of Alexander to r. and l.

21.8 Diademed head of Alexander to r. with diadem and horn of Zeus Ammon.

137

P L AT E S

21.9–10 Alexander with lion’s scalp, head and bust types.

Ref.: AMNG III 1 p. 15.

Plate 22 Makedonian Koinon (2) reverses Coins of ad 218–249 The reverses too are related to Alexander, but not exclusively. There are gods and goddesses like Zeus, Athena, Dionysos, Nike, the personification of Makedonia, and Herakles, with the latter two stressing connotations of Makedonian national pride. A number of scenes relate to the games in honour of Alexander. A table displays money bags and prize crowns for the victorious athletes in these competitions. Some coins even bear the name ‘Olympia Alexandreia’. Yet another shows the two neocorate temples with prize crowns and palm branches on top of them. But the majority of reversetypes focus on Alexander. Various scenes depict his virtue and legendary origins. He appears riding his horse, fighting his foes or hunting a lion. One type picks up the episode which foretold Alexander’s future deeds as he tamed his mount Boukephalos. Another coin shows a more realistic scene: between the two prominent temples we see a huge column supporting a warrior’s statue. There is not much doubt about the person represented here, as other coins show this man in more detail and the same pose. In full armour Alexander carries a spear with point downwards in one hand and a parazonium (sword and scabbard) in his arm. This gesture signals a peace gained after a war won and presents Alexander in the role of a saviour king. The statue is a reflection of an honorary monument to Alexander, which most certainly stood in Beroia, where representatives from the whole of Makedonia assembled for their meetings. Once upon a time Philoneicus the Thessalian brought Bucephalas, offering to sell him to Philip for 13 talents [78,000 drachms] and then went down into the plain to try the horse, who appeared to be savage and altogether intractable . . . But Alexander, who was near by said: ‘What a horse they are losing, because, for lack of skill and courage, they cannot manage him!’ . . . 138

P L AT E S

And after he had calmed the horse . . . with a light spring safely bestrode him . . . but when he saw that the horse was rid of the fear that had beset him . . . he gave him his head . . . His father, we are told, actually shed tears of joy, and when Alexander had dismounted . . . kissed him, saying: ‘My son, seek thee out a kingdom equal to thyself; Macedonia has not room for thee.’ Plutarch, Alexander 6.1–2, 4–5 (translated by B. Perrin. Loeb Classical Library vol. VII (1919)).

22.1–2 Tables with prizes for the games, one inscribed ‘Olympia Alexandria’.

22.3–5 The king on horseback.

22.6–7 The statue of Alexander.

139

P L AT E S

22.8–9 Alexander taming Boukephalos.

Ref.: AMNG III 1 pp. 19–24.

Plate 23 Makedonian Koinon – Olympias Coins of ad 231–235 and 238–244 Within the series of coins issued by the federation of the Makedonians, one type specifically focuses on Olympias, the wife of Philip II and mother of Alexander. Just like the episode of the taming of Boukephalos, here even the circumstances of Alexander’s conception are subject to a highly remarkable representation (otherwise known only from contorniates, see plate 28). Lying on a bed with her upper body raised, the queen greets a serpent which is closing in on her. This scene reflects a popular legend built around Alexander’s origins. While his mother already was notorious for her involvement in questionable Dionysiac rites (including the use of serpents), Alexander as alleged son of Zeus Ammon enjoyed a fundamental change in his parentage. It was now a common belief that in the absence of Philip, the god Zeus Ammon changed into a serpent and made love to Olympias, hence making Alexander a true son of a god fit to rule the world. Especially from the third century ad onwards, colourful stories like this one were more and more enlarged and finally assembled into the socalled Alexander Romance, a sequence of episodes telling Alexander’s life, later even transferred into the medieval Arab and Christian world. In contrast to Olympias’ role during Alexander’s reign, when she had no influence on his decisions whatsoever, later fiction invented a collection of letters between mother and son highlighting an alleged close and trusting relationship. Hence our coins are contemporary products of such ancient literary sources. There are also some reverses showing a female figure on a seat and feeding a snake. Although in this case it presumably relates to Olympias, this iconographic type is more usually associated with images of the goddess Hygieia and is possibly taken from such prototypes. Moreover, a serpent was once seen lying stretched out by the side of Olympias as she slept, and we are told that this . . . dulled the ardour 140

P L AT E S

of Philip’s attention to his wife . . . either because he feared that some spells and enchantments might be practised upon him by her, or because he shrank from her embraces in the conviction that she was the partner of a superior being. Plutarch, Alexander 2.4 (translated by B. Perrin. Loeb Classical Library vol. VII (1919)).

23.1–2 Olympias and the serpent.

Ref.: AMNG III 1 p. 20; Jouanno (1995) pp. 211–230.

Plate 24 Sagalassos in Pisidia Coins from ad 268–270 The city of Sagalassos lay on Alexander’s way from Asia Minor to the Kilikian Gates in the spring of 333 bc prior to his first engagement with the Persian Great king Dareios at Issos later that year. The warlike Pisidians threatened the army’s passage and decided to face the invader close to their major city Sagalassos. In the ensuing battle the Makedonians totally defeated the Pisidians and took their city by storm, losing only 21 men. It is 600 years later that a single coin-type within a larger issue of coins with the portrait of the Roman emperor Claudius II on the obverse commemorates this event: Alexander on horseback advances from the left, the god Zeus with thunderbolt and sceptre in his hands is in the centre, and a helmeted Pisidian on the right. The legend reads ‘Alexander’ and ‘[coin] of the people of Sagalassos’. It seems quite unreasonable that the inhabitants of Sagalassos in the third century ad should have had any interest in commemorating their own defeat. The Pisidian sharing the rock on which Zeus placed his foot with him (presumably an allegory for the city’s acropolis), therefore does not flee, but he is moving forward urging the invincible Alexander to follow, who, with the god’s support, will bring victory to his army. On other coins this statue motif is usually employed with heroes coming ashore and waving to their men to follow suit. The whole group, on the other hand, may recall a major 141

P L AT E S

monument erected within the city as the Zeus figure is modelled on a statue of Poseidon made by the famous sculptor Lysippos. Thus the former defeat is changed to a rather convenient outcome. Alexander takes Sagalassos Once hand-to-hand fighting had begun, the barbarians who had no protective armour and were engaged with hoplites were wounded and fell on all sides . . . Alexander, however, kept on the heels of the fugitives and stormed the city . . . Arrian, Anabasis of Alexander 1.28.6,8 (second century ad) (translated by P.A. Brunt. Loeb Classical Library vol. I (1976)).

24 Alexander on horseback, Zeus and a Pisidian.

Ref.: Stewart (1993) pp. 310–312.

Plate 25 Caracalla – being Alexander ad 197 and 215–217 and later A very interesting detail on this coin from Caesarea in Kappadokia and this tetradrachm of Heliopolis, helps us to solve a problem with a well-known devotee of Alexander. Allegedly the emperor Caracalla (sole reign ad 211– 217) started identifying himself with Alexander, when travelling through Moesia and Thrace on his way to the Parthian front in 215 ad. He also demanded to be called Hero of the East and allegedly raised a Makedonian phalanx of 16,000 troops. He is said to have once actually written to the Senate that Alexander had come to life again in the person of the Augustus (i.e. himself), having had a such short life before. Another writer reports that Caracalla wore Makedonian dress, the kausia, and even Makedonian boots. But yet another ancient source places this imperial Alexandermania in the time before his sole reign, when he was still Caesar and co-emperor during his father’s lifetime. This latter tradition may be correct, with this early date for Caracalla’s infatuation with Alexander, as one coin of Caesarea provides 142

P L AT E S

additional evidence. Here the young Caracalla very obviously shows his personal self-assessment as a reborn Alexander. In full armour – the pose itself being Alexander-inspired with shield and arm raised – Caracalla carries a shield with a portrait head of Alexander in profile to the left. And on a later coin from Heliopolis the shield shows a telling representation: a human figure in front of a horse and again the head with windblown hair so characteristic of the king. It is Alexander himself taming Boukephalos and his portrait takes the place of the usual medusa head in the shield’s centre. Caracalla could not have made this point more clearly if one considers the legend behind this episode. Taming a horse nobody could handle, the young prince earns the highest praise from his father (see plate 22). Such is the idol another prince chose for himself. And it has to be stressed that Caracalla is the only Roman emperor who was in his lifetime depicted with this kind of shield device. In fact this gold medallion from Aboukir is the third, though posthumous, example of this kind of representation, here combining Alexander’s portrait with a hunting scene. He was so enthusiastic about Alexander that he used certain weapons and cups which he believed had once been his, and he also set up many likenesses of him both in the camps and in Rome itself. Dio Cassius, Roman History (third century ad) 78.7 (translated by E. Cary. Loeb Classical Library vol. IX (1969)). For when he passed beyond the age of a boy, either by his father’s advice or through a natural cunning, or because he thought he must imitate Alexander of Macedonia, he became more reserved and stern . . . Alexander the Great and his achievements were ever on his lips. . . . The Scriptores Historiae Augustae, The life of Antoninus (Caracalla) 2.1 (fourth century ad) (translated by D. Magie. Loeb Classical Library vol. II (1924)).

25.1 Coin from Caesarea in Kappadokia, ad 197.

25.2 Tetradrachm from Heliopolis (Baalbek) in Syria, ad 215–217.

143

P L AT E S

25.3 Gold medallion from the Aboukir hoard, c. ad 222–235 [obv. Dressel S].

Ref.: Salzmann (2001) pp. 173–191.

Plate 26 Alexander and his parents c. ad 218–235 A most exciting manifestation of Alexander’s legend surfaced in the form of two famous gold hoards of the third century ad. The first, discovered in 1863 and now in Paris, features among other ancient gold objects three huge gold medals, all of them focusing on the famous king. One shows the bust of Alexander as Herakles wearing a lion’s scalp, a representation very close to one among the Koinon coins, a second the diademed king again with flying hair and emotive physiognomics longing for more. A third medal portrays his bearded father Philip II in full armour and with a diadem that he actually never wore, as Alexander himself was the first Greek king to make use of this royal attribute. As we do not know of any authenticated portraits of Alexander’s father it may derive from a posthumous re-created type. Two of these medallions share the same reverses with Alexander on horseback hunting a lion. The third shows Nike driving a chariot. Thirty-nine years after the Tarsos hoard in Aboukir in Egypt, on which coast the battle of the Nile was fought in 1798, twenty huge gold medallions similar to this earlier find came to light. After a thrilling odyssey through Europe and the United States, they ended up in the Museums of Lisbon, Berlin, Boston and Thessalonica. Besides a high number of representations related directly to Alexander, five medallions from Aboukir present us with images of Alexander’s mother 144

P L AT E S

Olympias. Three versions of the queen’s portrait appear on these obverses, recognisable by the serpent-decorated bracelets she wears. The prototypes of these portraits are taken from third-century bc models familiar from Ptolemaic queens (there are no surviving sculptured portraits of Olympias known so far). The reverses, too, relate to Olympias. A female figure riding sea creatures parallels the mother of Achilles, Alexander’s greatest idol, and Olympias, the king’s mother: what Thetis was for Achilles, Olympias now is for Alexander. And here again Olympias reminds us indirectly of Alexander’s legendary and divine background, if we believe in her encounter with Zeus Ammon himself. Through my father Philip I was born of the line of the deified Herakles, grandson of Zeus, and born of the line of Achilles through my mother Olympias. Inscription on the so-called Chigi shield (Inscriptiones Graecae XIV no. 1296).

26.1 Alexander as Herakles. Tarsos (obv. only).

145

P L AT E S

26.2A Alexander with flying hair. Tarsos.

26.2B Alexander on horse hunting a lion. Tarsos.

146

P L AT E S

26.3A Phillip II. Tarsos.

26.3B Nike in chariot.

147

P L AT E S

26.4 Olympias. Aboukir [obv. Dressel O].

26.5 Olympias. Aboukir [Dressel D].

Ref.: Savio (1994/1995) pp. 73–103.

Plate 27 Gold Alexanders from Aboukir c. ad 218–235 Here we witness a whole new world of Alexanders, elaborate versions of the great king seen through the eyes of a third-century ad Graeco-Roman onlooker. Some we are already familiar with as they were in use with the contemporary bronze coinage of Roman Makedonia under emperors from Elagabalus to Philip the Arab. Again these images are designed to describe the military and legendary virtues of Alexander. The one with ram’s horn and diadem presents him as 148

P L AT E S

the true son of Zeus Ammon and is taken directly from the famous model of Lysimachos’ coins (see plate 8). His qualities as a military leader are emphasised by various versions of portraits of Alexander wearing an Attic helmet. In one, the helmet is decorated with a complex battle scene, in another there appears Ganymede being taken away by Zeus’ eagle, in a third there is a common Makedonian motif, Artemis (with the epithet Tauropolos) riding a bull. Reverses show Nike, the goddess of victory, decorating a trophy and holding a round shield with two lovers on it. On another, we observe Nike presenting Alexander with his armour and this time the shield shows Achilles slaying Penthesilea, the queen of the Amazons (compare plate 28). Other reverses show Alexander hunting as he does on the medallion, where he is depicted on foot spearing a wild boar (a deed considered to prove full manhood in Makedonian society). A tree in which we see a serpent hiding implies countryside as the scene of this virtue. The most important and unique representation of Alexander survived in three medallions all struck with the same die: Alexander in full armour with diadem and spear in his hand seen from the front. This time he lacks a helmet, allowing us to see his flowing hair. He is equipped with a round shield with the zodiac on it, which makes the function of this portrait even clearer: Alexander is Kosmokrator, true king of the world, ruling even over the stars in heaven. In summary, it is evident that Alexander is finally turned into a legendary hero and symbol of Makedonian nationalism incorporating military and other virtues, his human origins as an offspring of Philip and Olympias are paralleled by mythological comparison, and he himself is associated with his idol Achilles. Presumably these extraordinary medallions were produced on the occasion of the Alexander festivals in Beroia in Makedonia, which were so prominent in the first half of the third century ad. Whether they represent the prizes of the victorious athletes in agonistic competitions or were given as presents to high-level officials remains debatable.

149

P L AT E S

27.1 Alexander with the horn of Zeus Ammon [obv. Dressel A].

27.2 Alexander with Attic helmet/Nike with trophy [Dressel B].

150

P L AT E S

27.3–4 Alexander with Attic helmet [obv. Dressel M, N].

27.5 Alexander Kosmokrator (the ruler of the world) [obv. Dressel C].

151

27.6 Alexander hunting a boar [rev. Dressel F].

P L AT E S

27.7 Nike presenting Alexander’s arms [rev. Dressel U].

Ref.: Dressel (1906) passim.

Plate 28 Contorniates – Alexander in Rome c. ad 350–425 The very same appreciation of Alexander and his legend is found in Rome itself in late antiquity. A number of huge, bronze (not gold) medallions were produced in private workshops. To express good wishes for the year to come, these medallions were given as presents on New Year’s Day among the pagan elite of Rome around ad 400. Besides emperors and scenes from the world of the circus, they also feature the famous king and his mother Olympias as icons of exemplary virtue and legendary deeds and background. Here they become emblems of a glorious non-Christian past in a contemporary Christian society. Contorniate obverses reduce Alexander’s portrait to two types: again the famous representation of Herakles during his lifetime is understood as one of Alexander himself, in some cases the Latin legends identifying him as ‘Alexander’ called ‘the Great’ or ‘the Makedonian’ respectively. The second goes back to the type so popular on civic coins: the diademed head of the king, in a few cases with the Greek legend Megas (‘the Great’). The stylistic rendering varies from true copies of Hellenistic types to those showing the elongated characteristics of contemporary art. Some reverse scenes feature Alexander on horseback slaying his foe, with the same Latin inscriptions, copying fourth-century ad coin-types. The selection of their designers favoured the use of already familiar motives: here, too, Olympias awaits the serpent while resting on her bed and the queen’s head also decorated a few obverses. In a few cases even a Latin inscription ‘Queen Olympias’ is added. A rare reverse offers us a scene which almost continues one of the stories a medallion from Aboukir told: it 152

P L AT E S

shows Alexander having received his armour and now holding his shield, which is again decorated with the group of Achilles and Penthesilea. Clearly contorniates here took their iconography from types in use at least a century earlier in the time of the Severan dynasty. As both the gold medallions from Tarsos and Aboukir and the bronze coinage of the Makedonian Koinon, contorniates focus on Alexander’s colourful legend and his divine origins: the objective of these medallions and their recipients is to view Alexander as a vessel and mirror of imagination and virtues, not as a historical figure. Alexander everywhere with the family of the Macriani For an embossed head of Alexander the Great of Makedonia was always used by the men on their rings and their silver plate, and by the women on their head-dresses, their bracelets, their rings and ornaments of every kind, so that even to-day there are still in the family tunics and fillets and women’s cloaks which show the likeness of Alexander in threads of divers colours. Scriptores Historiae Augustae, The thirty pretenders 14.3–5 (fourth century ad). (translated by D. Magie. Loeb Classical Library vol. III (1932)).

28.1 Olympias and Alexander with shield.

153

P L AT E S

28.2–3 Herakles-type portrait and diademed head.

28.4 Caracalla and Olympias on kline.

Ref.: A. and E. Alföldi, Die Kontorniat-Medaillons I–II. Walter de Gruyter (Berlin/New York 1976/1990) pp. 80–87, 109–111.

154

P L AT E S

Plate 29 See discussion in chapter 4.

29.1 Pope Paul III and Alexander with the Jewish high priest, 1545/46.

29.2 Alexander and his triumph in Babylon.

29.3 100 drachma, Greece 1990.

155

DESCRIPTION OF COINS ILLUSTRATED

Photographs by author and scale 1:1 unless stated otherwise. pl. 1.1: Alexander III, tetradrachm, ‘Amphipolis’ mint, 17.13 g, 27 mm, 5 h. (h = the die axis indicated by the hours of a clock). Obv.: Head of Herakles wearing lion’s scalp. Rev.: AΛEΞAN∆POY. Zeus Aetophoros (carrying an eagle), in left field stern. Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Ref.: SNG Ashmolean 3 no. 2527; type of Price (1991a) no. 5. pl. 1.2: Ditto, stater, ‘Amphipolis’, 8.26 g, 19 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Head of Athena wearing Corinthian helmet. Rev.: AΛEΞAN∆POY. Nike carrying stylis (mast) and wreath, in left field trident-head. Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Ref.: SNG Ashmolean 3 no. 2523; type of Price (1991a) no. 172. pl. 1.3: Ditto, tetradrachm, Babylon, 17.21 g, 27 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Head of Herakles wearing lion’s scalp. Rev.: BAΣIΛEΩΣ AΛEΞAN∆POY. Zeus Aetophoros, in left field grapes, below throne a monogram. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Acc. 1873 C.R. Fox. Ref.: Type of Price (1991a) no. 3684. pl. 1.4: Ditto, Odessos. 15.80 g, 30 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Head of Herakles wearing lion’s scalp. Rev.: BAΣIΛEΩΣ AΛEΞAN∆POY, inner left field O∆H, in exergue EΣTIAI. Zeus Aetophoros. Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Ref.: SNG Stancomb no. 270; type of Price (1991a) no. 1206. pl. 2.1: ‘Dekadrachm’/‘five-shekel’ of unknown authority c. 326/323 bc. 42.20 g, 32 mm, 4 h. Obv.: Alexander on horse charging elephant. Left field Ξ. – Rev.: Alexander holding thunderbolt and spear, crowned by Nike flying above (some of these details are only visible in pl. 2.2). Left field monogram AB. Inv. 1887.6–9.1. Photograph © Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: Holt (2003) p. 167 E/A 1. pl. 2.2: Ditto. 39.66 g, 31 mm, 12 h. Inv. 1926.4–2.1. Photograph © 156

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: Holt (2003) p. 167 E/A 2. pl. 3.1: Bronze unit. Naukratis. 3.17 g, 16 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Male head right. Below AΛE. – Rev.: Female head wearing necklace right, below NAY. Inv. 1888.8–2.14. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: E.T. Newell, Miscellanea Numismatica: Cyrene to India. ANS Numismatic Notes and Monographs 82 (1938) pp. 61–62 pl. 4 b. pl. 3.2: Bronze fraction. Memphis. 0.92 g, 10 mm, 2 h. Obv.: Male head wearing Phrygian-type helmet right. – Rev.: Forepart of Pegasos right, above A, below wreath. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: Price (1991a) no. 3960 a. pl. 4.1: Ptolemy, tetradrachm, Memphis. 17.13 g, 28 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Head of Alexander with scalp of elephant and ram’s horn right, skin knotted below chin. – Rev.: AΛEΞAN∆POY. Zeus Aetophoros on throne left, legs crossed and sceptre in left hand. In left field thunderbolt, monogram below throne. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: BMC Ptolemies no. 4. pl. 4.2: Ditto. 17.13 g, 27 mm, 11 h. Obv.: The same, but with fillet (‘mitra’). Scalp of elephant moves up the forehead making space for an anastolé. – Rev.: No changes, in left field thunderbolt, below throne PY. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: BMC Ptolemies no. 5. pl. 4.3: Ditto. 14.24 g, 31 mm, 12 h. Obv.: As before, but now larger compartment of skin at bottom of head and with scaly aegis. – Rev.: No changes, in left field eagle. Inv. 1883.6–8.5. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: Svoronos no. 29. pl. 4.4: Ditto. 15.60 g, 29 mm, 12 h. Obv.: As before. – Rev.: AΛEΞAN∆POY. Athena (Promachos) with shield and spear to right. In right field eagle on thunderbolt to right and one monogram on each side. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: Zervos (1974) p. 196 no. 640 i; type of Svoronos no. 139. pl. 4.5: Ptolemy, stater, Alexandria. 8.61 g, 21 mm, 3 h. Obv.: Head of Alexander wearing an elephant’s scalp, mitra, scaly aegis and ram’s horn to right. – Rev.: Prora to right. Lisbon. Museu Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Ref.: M.C. Hipólito, Ancient Greek Coins, Gold. The Calouste Gulbenkian Museum (Lisbon 1998) no. 110. pl. 4.6: Ptolemy I, stater, Kyrene. 7.16 g, 18 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Head of Ptolemy I with diadem and aegis to right. – Rev.: ΠTOΛEMAIOY / BAΣIΛEΩΣ. Alexander, diademed, standing to left in chariot with four elephants, driving to left. Holds thunderbolt in right hand and reins in his left (and possibly another undetermined object (sceptre)). Aegis on left shoulder. Below monograms. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: BMC Cyrene p. 73 no. 2. 157

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

pl. 4.7: Ditto. Alexandria. 7.13 g, 18 mm, 1 h. Reverse only. Acc. 1879/224. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: Svoronos no. 103 α; Zervos (1974) issue 92 no. 760 a. pl. 4.8: Ditto. 7.08 g, 19 mm, 1 h. Reverse only. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: BMC Ptolemies p. 11 no. 94; Zervos (1974) issue 94 no. 761 a. pl. 5.1: Ditto. Bronze coin, Alexandria. 9.92 g, 22 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Alexander with elephant’s scalp, ram’s horn, and scaly aegis to right. – Rev.: ΠTOΛEMAIOY BAΣIΛEΩΣ. Eagle on thunderbolt, in left field Σ. Acc. Alter Bestand. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: Type of Svoronos no. 215. pl. 5.2: Ptolemy II, ditto, but no monogram. 10 g, 24 mm, 12 h. Acc. CM 1410–1963. Department of Coins & Medals, The Fitzwilliam Museum Cambridge. Ref.: Type of Svoronos no. 439. pl. 5.3: Ptolemy I, ditto, same mint. 3.78 g, 17 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Head of Alexander with ram’s horn wearing a mitra, with short hair, to right. – Rev.: AΛE. Eagle on thunderbolt, in left field EY, in right field monogram. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: BMC Ptolemies no. 17. pl. 5.4: Ditto. 4.04 g, 20 mm, 12 h. Same type of obv. and rev. Acc. 1871/133. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: Svoronos no. 51 α. pl. 5.5: Ditto. 4.80 g, 20 mm, 12 h. Obv.: As before, but with longer hair. – Rev.: ΠTOΛEMAIOY. Eagle on thunderbolt. Given by Major R.G. Gayer-Anderson 27.4.1943. Department of Coins & Medals, The Fitzwilliam Museum Cambridge. Ref.: Compare Svoronos no. 156. pl. 6: Agathokles of Syracuse, stater, Syracuse. 8.45 g, 19 mm, 2 h. Obv.: Head of Alexander with elephant’s scalp and aegis to right. – Rev.: AΓAΘOKΛEOΣ. Winged Athena Promachos with helmet, shield and spear to right. Inv. MK GR 7234. © Photograph Kunsthistorisches Museum, Wien. Ref.: Ierardi (1995/1996) pp. 16–20 pl. 1. 8. pl. 7.1: Seleukos I, double daric, Ekbatana. 16.08 g, 21 mm, 7 h. Obv.: Head of Alexander wearing elephant’s scalp right. – Rev.: Nike holding wreath and stylis, in left field head of horned horse, below ∆I. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: ESM no. 460 α. pl. 7.2: Ditto. 16.63 g, 22 mm, 11 h. Same type of obv. and rev. Acc. 1906 Löbbecke. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: ESM no. 460 γ. pl. 7.3: Seleukos I, bronze coin, Ekbatana. 5.71 g, 16 mm, 6 h. Obv.: Head of Alexander wearing elephant’s scalp right. – Rev.: AΛEΞAN∆POY. Nike holding wreath and stylis, in left field head of horned horse. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: Price (1991a) no. 3916 a. 158

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

pl. 8.1: Lysimachos, tetradrachm, Lampsakos. 16.97 g, 28 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Head of Alexander wearing diadem and ram’s horn to right. – Rev.: BAΣIΛEΩΣ – ΛYΣIMAXOY. Athena Nikephoros with Corinthian helmet sitting to left, holds in her right hand Nike behind spear with point downwards. Nike holds a wreath above the first letter of Lysimachos’ name. On the right leaning against the throne a round shield with the head of Medusa on it. In left field monogram, in exergue crescent. Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Ref.: SNG Ashmolean 4 no. 3728; type of Thompson no. 47. pl. 8.2: Ditto. 17.11 g, 33 mm, 12 h. Same type of obv. and rev. Acc. 1875 Graf von Prokesch-Osten. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: Type of Thompson no. 49. pl. 8.3: Ditto, stater, Pella. 8.53 g, 18 mm, 9 h. Same type of obv. and rev., on reverse in exergue K and in inner left field monogram. Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Ref.: SNG Ashmolean 4 no. 3752; type of Thompson no. 241. pl. 8.4: Byzantium, tetradrachm of Lysimachos type. 16.62 g, 34 mm, 12 h. On reverse below throne BY, in exergue trident. Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum. Ref.: SNG Stancomb no. 6. pl. 9: Agathokles of Baktria, tetradrachm. 16.33 g, 36 mm, 11 h. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POY – TOY ΦIΛIΠΠOY. Head of Alexander wearing a lion’s scalp to right. – Rev.: Zeus Aetophoros holding sceptre in his left hand sitting on throne left, legs crossed. BAΣIΛEYONTOΣ – AΓAΘOKΛEOYΣ, in exergue ∆IKAIOY. Photograph © Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: M. Mitchiner, Indo-Greek and Indo-Scythian coinage I. Hawkins Publications (London 1975) p. 78 no. 142. pl. 10.1: Aesillas the Quaestor, tetradrachm, Makedonia. 16.75 g, 31 mm, 11 h. Obv.: Head of Alexander with long hair and small ram’s horn to right. Below MAKE∆ONΩN, in left field Θ. – Rev.: From left to right Cista, club, and Sella curulis. Above AESILLAS, below in right field Q. Laurel wreath. Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Ref.: SNG Ashmolean 3 no. 3306; Bauslaugh (2000) p. 38 no. 9–44 i. pl. 10.2: Ditto, but on obverse in right field SI. 16.32 g, 31 mm, 12 h. Inv. 115. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: Bauslaugh (2000) p. 47 no. 18–93. pl. 11.1: Alexandria kat’Isson. Bronze coin. 6.94 g, 20 mm, 11 h. Obv.: Head of Herakles wearing lion’s scalp to right. – Rev.: AΛEΞAN∆PEΩN. Zeus standing to left, wreath in hand. In left field monogram. Inv. 90.1–10.12. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: BMC Lycaonia, Isauria, and Cilicia p. 29 no. 2 (first specimen). 159

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

pl. 11.2: Ditto. 11.34 g, 24 mm, 12h. Obv.: Draped bust of Alexander with diadem to right. – Rev.: ET IP AΛEΞAN–∆PEΩN (year 110 = ad 43/ 44). Dionysos standing to left with panther, thyrsos and kantharos. Inv. Y.28455, 110. Photograph © Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: SNG Cilicie no. 2416. pl. 11.3: Ditto. 8.88 g, 22 mm, 12 h. Obv.: AVTOKP KAIC NEP TPAIANOC APICT CEB ΓEPM ∆AK. Laureate bust of Trajan to right. – Rev.: AΛEΞAN∆PEΩN KAT ICCON ETOVC AΠP (year 181 = ad 113/114). Alexander with coat seen from the front, turned to left, holds a spear pointing downwards (rather than a sceptre) in left hand, in right hand a bowl (phiale). Inv. 1979.1–1.2548. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: SNG Aulock no. 5465. pl. 11.4: Ditto. 6.52 g, 20 mm, 6 h. Obv.: AVT K M A AN–TΩNINOC CEB. Laureate head of Caracalla right. – Rev.: Ditto, spear point downwards. AΛEΞAN∆P–EΩN KAT ICCON. In left field ET B–ΠC (year 282 = ad 215/216). Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: SNG Cilicie no. 2418. pl. 12.1: Aigeai in Kilikia. Billon tetradrachm. 9.66 g, 23 mm, 12 h. Obv.: AVTOKP KAIC TPAIANOC A∆PIANOC CEB. Draped and laureate bust of Hadrian to right. – Rev.: AIΓEAIΩN – ETOVC ∆ΞP (year 164 = ad 117/118). Diademed head of Alexander to right, goat below to left. Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Ref.: C.J. Howgego in: CIRP p. 6 pl. 1.2.20; type of SNG Cilicie no. 2326. pl. 12.2: Ditto. Bronze coin. 19 g, 27 mm, 12 h. Obv.: M OΠE ANTΩNINOC KAICE. Draped and armoured bust of Diadumenian to right. – Rev.: MAKPEINOVΠ AIΓEΩN M EVΓ Π [Θ?], at bottom ∆ΞC (year 264 = ad 217/218). Head of Herakles (Alexander) with scalp of lion to right. Department of Coins & Medals, The Fitzwilliam Museum Cambridge. Ref.: SNG Fitzwilliam Museum IV Part VII Asia Minor: Lycia – Cappadocia (London 1967) no. 5225; type of SNG Cilicie nos. 2349–2350. pl. 12.3: Ditto. 18.02 g, 27 mm, 6 h. Obv.: M OΠ ANTΩNEINOC KAICAP. Draped and armoured bust of Diadumenian to right. – Rev.: MAKPEINOVΠOΛE AIΓAI MA EVΓ ΠI ΘE, in left field Γ, in right field ΞC (year 263 = ad 217). Diademed head of Alexander with long hair to right. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: SNG Cilicie no. 2348. pl. 12.4: Ditto. 13.61 g, 27 mm, 12 h. Obv.: M OΠE ANTΩNEINOC KAI. Draped and armoured bust of Diadumenian to right. – Rev: MAKPEINOVΠ M EVΓ Π Θ AIΓEΩN, above goat ∆ΞC (year 264 = ad 217/218). Goat with torches attached to horns. Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Ref.: Type of SNG Cilicie no. 2352. 160

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

pl. 13.1: Nikaia in Bithynia. Bronze coin. 2.85 g, 17 mm, 6 h. Obv.: AV K KOMO∆OC – ANTΩNIN. Laureate head of Commodus to right. – Rev.: AΛEΞAN∆–P–ON NIKAIEIC. Diademed head of Alexander to right. Acc. 1900 Imhoof-Blumer. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: Type of Recueil I 3 no. 287. pl. 13.2: Ditto. 2.92 g, 16 mm, 12 h. Obv.: [M A KOM] AN[TΩNINOC]. (Armoured?) bust of Commodus to right. – Rev.: Ditto, to right, head not tilted, but Alexander’s hair more vivid. NIKAI–E–ΩN. Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Ref.: Recueil I 3 no. 290. pl. 13.3: Ditto. 3.85 g, 17 mm, 7 h. Obv.: AVT KOMO∆O – ANTΩNINO. Laureate head of Commodus right. – Rev.: AΛEΞAN∆PON – NIKAIEIC. Alexander, naked, standing, seen from the front with spear (point upwards) in left hand. Whole figure on base line. Right hand touches hip and holds object (more probably a thunderbolt than a sword). Head turned to left of figure and tilted slightly upwards. Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Ref.: Recueil I 3 no. 291 var. pl. 13.4: Ditto. 8.55 g, 26 mm. Obv.: M AVP CEH A–ΛΞAN∆POC (sic) AVΓ. Draped, armoured and radiate bust of Severus Alexander to right. – Rev.: NI–KAIEΩN. Head of Alexander with long hair in neck and broad diadem to right, head tilted upwards. Reproduced from SNG Aulock no. 627 pl. 19 (no axis recorded). pl. 14.1: Alexandria in the Troad. Bronze coin. 6.01 g, 28 mm, 6 h. Obv.: IMP CAI (sic) M AVR – COMMOD AVG. Laureate head of Commodus to right. – Rev.: COL AVG – TROA. Alexander riding on horseback to left greets the statue of Apollo Smintheus. Inv. 230. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: Bellinger (1961) no. A 194. pl. 14.2: Ditto. 7.42 g, 24 mm, 12 h. Obv.: CRISPINA – AVGSTA (sic). Draped bust of Crispina to right. – Rev.: COL AVG – T/A – O/R/D. Alexander on right performs sacrifice above altar. On left the statue of Apollo Smintheus. Above eagle carrying bull’s head. Inv. 249. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: Bellinger (1961) no. A 239. pl. 14.3: Ditto. 7.68 g, 26 mm, 12 h. Obv.: [M] AV ANTO–NINVS PI–VS AV. Laureate, draped and armoured bust of Caracalla to right. Rev.: As before, but legends reads COL – AVG, in exergue TROA. Inv. 270. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: Bellinger (1961) no. A 271. pl. 15: Smyrna in Ionia. Bronze coin. 21.14 g, 35 mm, 6 h. Obv.: AV K M IOV – ΦIΛIΠΠOC. Draped, armoured, and laureate bust of Philip the Arab to right. – Rev.: Ditto. CMVPNAIΩN Γ NEΩ EΠ C AΦ EΠI, in exergue 161

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

KTHTOV. The dream of Alexander as founder of the New Symrna, the king sleeps under a plane-tree, his head rests on a round shield, a sword lies next to his left arm, helmet at right. On the left are the two Nemeseis wearing chitons, one holding a cubit rule, the other a bridle (their usual attributes). Issued by the Strategos Aph . . . Epiktetos. Inv. 1979.1–1.1797. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: SNG Aulock no. 2231. pl. 16: Kapitolias in Syria Palaestina. Bronze coin. 11.14 g, 27 mm, 12 h. Obv.: AVT K M AV–P KOMO∆OC. Bust or head of Commodus with laurel wreath to right. – Rev.: KAΠI AΛEΞ–A MAKE ΓENAP, in left field Γ, in right field Ч (year 93 = ad 190). Bust of a bearded Alexander in a highly decorated cloak to right, short, curly hair and oblong facial features. Inv. Y.24526 (ex Henri Seyrig coll.). Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: Spijkerman (1978) p. 102 no. 15. pl. 17: Gerasa in Arabia. Bronze coin. 11.03 g, 24 mm, 12 h. Obv.: AVT KAI M AVP – ANTΩNEINOC. Laureate, draped, and armoured bust of Caracalla to right. – Rev.: AΛEΞ MAK KTI – ΓEPACWN. Head of Alexander with diadem to right. Inv. MA 16.931 (ex Henri Seyrig coll.). Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: Spijkerman (1978) p. 164 no. 31. pl. 18: ‘Kapitolias and Abila’. Bronze coin. 23 mm. Obv.: Π CEΠT ΓE–TAC KAI–C. Draped and armoured bust of Geta to right. Rev.: In exergue AΛE, from left IAN∆POC – CEΛEY, again in exergue KOC. Alexander, diademed, standing left and Seleukos right, both in armour, each holding a spear and shaking hands. Reproduced from A.G. van der Dussen, Auction 24, 1–2 June 1995, lot 3640 pl. 17 (neither weight nor axis recorded). pl. 19.1: Apollonia Mordiaion in Pisidia. Bronze coin. 19.49 g, 31 mm, 6 h. Obv.: AΛEΞA KTIC AΠOΛΛΩNIATΩN. Head of Alexander with lion’s scalp to right. – Rev.: IΠΠOΦO–PAC. River god Hippophoras reclining left with reed, cornucopiae and vessel. Acc. 1900 ImhoofBlumer. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: Type of BMC Lycia, Pamphilia, and Pisidia p. 202 no. 1. pl. 19.2: Apollonia Mordiaion and Lykia. Bronze coin. 16.39 g, 32 mm, 6 h. Obv.: As before. – Rev.: AΠOΛΛΩNI–AT – KAI ΛVKIΩN, in exergue OMONOIA. Apollonia and Lykia shaking hands. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: BMC Lycia, Pamphilia, and Pisidia p. 204 no. 10. pl. 20: Caesarea ad Libanum. Bronze coin. 3.43 g, 28 mm, 6 h. Obv.: IMP C 162

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

M AV – ANTONINVS. Draped, armoured, and laureate bust of Elagabalus to right. – Rev.: COL CE–[S]ARIA, in exergue AΛ[Φ] (year 531 = ad 219/220). Temple with four columns in front, in centre left Tyche standing, holding standard in her right hand, her left foot set on river god below. At her side Alexander (?), crowning Tyche with a wreath, in exergue figure of Silenos. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: BMC Phoenicia p. 110 no. 8. pl. 21.1: Makedonian Koinon. Bronze coin. 13.76 g, 27 mm, 6 h. Obverse only. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Diademed head of Alexander with flying hair to right. – Rev.: KOINON MAKE∆ONΩN B N. Alexander on horseback to right, star below. Inv. 1958.3–4.59. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: Type of AMNG III 1 no. 663. pl. 21.2: Ditto. 13.61 g, 25 mm, 6 h. Obverse only. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Diademed head of Alexander with flying hair to left. – Rev.: KOI (in exergue) – NON – MAKE∆ONΩN NEΩ B. Alexander taming Boukephalos. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 473.4; BMC Macedonia no. 136. pl. 21.3: Ditto. 13.79 g, 26 mm, 6 h. Obverse only. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Diademed head of Alexander with long hair to right. – Rev.: KOINON MAK–E∆ONΩN, in left field B, in right field N. Alexander standing with sword in right arm and spear (point downwards) in left hand, head turned to his right. Inv. 1911.7–4.171. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 582 var. pl. 21.4: Ditto. 9.55 g, 26 mm, 2 h. Obverse only. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Head of Alexander with Attic helmet to right, star below. – Rev.: KOINO–N MAKE∆ONΩN B, below NEΩKO/P. Statue of Alexander on column situated between two temples, above each one prize crown and palm branch. Acc. 1900 Imhoof-Blumer. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 786.2. pl. 21.5: Ditto. 8.09 g, 25 mm, 1 h. Obverse only. Obv.: AΛE–ΞAN∆POV. Diademed and armoured bust of Alexander to right seen from front. – Rev.: KOINON / MA/KE∆ONΩN / B NE. Two temples seen from the front. Acc. 1875 Graf von Prokesch-Osten. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 813.1. pl. 21.6: Ditto. Bronze fraction. 3.90 g, 20 mm, 6 h. Obverse only. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Diademed, draped, and armoured bust of Alexander to right seen from front. – Rev.: K MAKE∆ONΩN, in exergue B NEΩ. Lion walking to left. Acc. 1873 C.R. Fox. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 816.1. pl. 21.7: Ditto. Bronze coin. 11.46 g, 25 mm, 6 h. Obverse only. Obv.: A–ΛE –ΞAN∆–POV. Diademed, draped, and armoured bust of Alexander with shield and spear to left seen from the back. – Rev.: K–O–I–NON 163

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

MAKE∆ONΩN NEΩ. Alexander on horseback to right. Inv. 1996/236. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: Type of AMNG III 1 no. 405. pl. 21.8: Ditto. 13.13 g, 27 mm, 6 h. Obverse only. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Head of Alexander with ram’s horn and diadem to right. – Rev.: KOINON MAKE∆ONΩN ∆IC NEΩ. Olympias on throne to left feeding serpent. Acc. 1906 Löbbecke. © Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Photograph by Lübke und Wiedemann, Stuttgart. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 529.1. pl. 21.9: Ditto. 12.34 g, 26 mm, 6 h. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Head of Alexander wearing lion’s scalp to right. – Rev.: KOINON MAKE∆ONΩN N–EΩ. Alexander on horseback to right hunting lion below. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref. AMNG III 1 no. 419.2; BMC Macedonia no. 102. pl. 21.10: Ditto. 11.92 g, 27 mm, 12 h. Obverse only. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Bust of Alexander wearing lion’s scalp to right. – Rev.: KOINON MAKE–∆ONΩN – B NE–Ω. Alexander taming Boukephalos. Inv. 177. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 764.3. pl. 22.1: Ditto. 13.11 g, 26 mm, 6 h. Reverse only. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆P– OV. Diademed head of Alexander with long hair to right. – Rev.: KOI– NON MAKE∆ONΩN – B NE, in exergue Ω. Table with two prize crowns and palm branches. On table: OΛYMΠI/A AΛEΞA/N∆PIA. Inv. 179. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 801.2. pl. 22.2: Ditto. 9.42 g, 25 mm, 2 h. Reverse only. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Diademed head of Alexander with long hair to right. – Rev.: KOINON MAKE∆ONΩN NEΩK / B. Table with two prize crowns and palm branches, amphora below. Inv. 1895.7–3.8. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 600.1. pl. 22.3: Ditto. Reverse only. See pl. 21.9. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 419.2; BMC Macedonia no. 102. pl. 22.4: Ditto. Reverse only. 9.98 g, 26 mm, 7 h. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Head of Alexander wearing lion’s scalp to right. – Rev. KOINON MAKE∆ONON (sic) B NEΩ. Alexander on horseback to right, serpent below. Acc. 1933/325. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: Type of AMNG III 1 no. 727. pl. 22.5: Ditto. 13.14 g, 26 mm, 12 h. Reverse only. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Head of Alexander with Attic helmet to right. – Rev.: KOINON – MAKE∆O–NΩN E Ω. Alexander on horseback to right, star below. Inv. 1922.3–17.55. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 444a.3. pl. 22.6: Ditto. 11.30 g, 25 mm, 8 h. Reverse only. Obv. and rev. as pl. 21.4. 164

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

Inv. 1927.3–2.3. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: Type of AMNG III 1 no. 786. pl. 22.7: Ditto. Reverse only. See pl. 21.3. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 582 var. pl. 22.8: Ditto. 11.95 g, 27 mm, 12 h. Reverse only. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Head of Alexander with long hair to right, thunderbolt below. – Rev.: KOINON MAKE–∆ONΩN – B NE/Ω. Alexander taming Boukephalos. Acc. 1900 Imhoof-Blumer © Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Photograph by Lübke und Wiedemann, Stuttgart. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 556.2. pl. 22.9: Ditto. See pl. 21.2. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 473.4. pl. 23.1: Ditto. 13.17 g, 28 mm, 1 h. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Diademed head of Alexander with long hair to right. – Rev.: KOINON MAKE∆ONΩN N–EΩKO. Olympias on a bed with serpent. Acc. Löbbecke 1906. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 367.2. pl. 23.2: Ditto. 12.58 g, 27 mm, 12 h. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POV. Diademed head of Alexander with long hair to right. – Rev.: KOINON MAKE∆ONΩN ∆IC NEΩ. Olympias on throne feeding serpent. Inv. 1933.9–8.2. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: Type of AMNG III 1 no. 550. pl. 24: Sagalassos in Pisidia. Bronze coin. 17.76 g, 34 mm, 12 h. Obv.: AV K M AVP – KΛAV∆ION. Draped, armoured and laureate bust of Claudius Gothicus to right. At bottom countermark (head of Tyche). – Rev.: A–ΛEΞAN∆POC, in exergue CAΓAΛAC/CEΩN. On the left Alexander wielding a spear riding on horseback to the right. In the centre the naked figure of Zeus seen from the front, head turned to his left, right hand raised, thunderbolt in left hand, left foot set on a rock. On right side the figure of a Pisidian warrior, moving right, but head turned back, wearing a helmet and holding a sword (?) in his left hand. His right hand reaches for Zeus and his left foot touches the rock under the foot of Zeus. At left bottom an ear of corn. At right denominational mark I (=10 assaria/bronze units). Inv. 92.7–9.234. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: BMC Lycia, Pamphylia, and Pisidia p. 250 no. 50. pl. 25.1: Caesarea in Kappadokia. Bronze coin. 14.08 g, 27 mm. Obv.: A[V K M AVPH ANTΩN]INOC. Naked laureate bust of the young Caracalla to left. He rests a spear on his right shoulder and a round shield in front of his body. The sword belt (balteus) is visible on his upper body. In the centre of the shield Alexander’s head is depicted to the left. – Rev.: MHTPOΠO – KAICAPIA. On the altar ET E (year 5 = ad 197). Mount Argaios with altar. Ref.: Reproduced from Auctiones Basel 17, 7–8 June 1988, no. 372 pl. 17. Compare Salzmann (2001) pp. 181, 188 165

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

second type no. 2; E.A. Sydenham with supplement by A.G. Malloy, The coinage of Caesarea in Cappadocia. Reprint by Attic Books (New York 1978) p. 155 no. 527 d (no axis recorded). pl. 25.2: Heliopolis in Syria. Billon tetradrachm. 12.40 g, 25 mm, 12 h. Obv.: CEB AVT K MA – ANTΩNEINOC. Laureate and armoured bust of Caracalla with spear and shield to left. On shield head of Alexander to left, in front figure of Alexander to right, above horse to left. – Rev.: ∆HMAPX EΞ VΠATOC TO ∆. Eagle, below star and lion. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: BMC Galatia, Cappadocia, Syria p. 143 no. 44; Salzmann (2001) p. 190, fourth type no. 3. pl. 25.3: Gold medallion from Aboukir. 69.42 g, 57 mm, 12 h. Obverse only. Obv.: Laureate and armoured bust of Caracalla with sword, spear and shield to left. On shield head of Alexander to left, above figure of Alexander on horse to left, hunting a lion. – Rev.: Nereid riding on sea centaur to left. The latter holds a trident and a fish in his hands. Among the waves four dolphins. Inv. 2433. Lisbon. Museu Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Ref.: Dressel (1906) pp. 19–20 S; Savio (1994/1995) p. 82 S. pl. 26.1: Gold medallion from Tarsos. 98.65 g, 65–68 mm, 12 h. Obverse only. Obv.: Bust of Alexander with lion’s scalp to right – Rev.: In exergue AΛEZAN∆POC, on left BA–CIΛEYC. Alexander on horse hunting a lion with a spear. Inv. F 1671. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 873; Savio (1994/1995) p. 74 no. 1. pl. 26.2: Ditto. 110.3 g, 68–70 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Diademed head of Alexander with flying hair to right. – Rev.: Lion hunt as on first piece from Tarsos, possibly from the same die. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 872; Savio (1994/1995) p. 74 no. 3. pl. 26.3: Ditto. 93.85 g, 64–67 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Diademed armoured bust of Philip II to left. Breastplate decorated with scene showing Ganymede kidnapped by Zeus’ eagle. – Rev.: Left BACIΛE, top WC, in exergue AΛEΞAN∆POY. Nike in chariot driving to the right, holds palm-branch in left hand. Inv. 1673. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Médailles. Ref.: AMNG III 1 no. 874; Savio (1994/1995) p. 74 no. 2. pl. 26.4: Gold medallion from Aboukir. 49 g, 46 mm, 12 h. Obverse only. Obv.: Draped and veiled bust of Olympias to right, holding a sceptre with coiling serpent. – Rev.: BACIΛEΩC – AΛEΞAN∆POV. Athena wearing chiton, peplos, aegis, and Corinthian helmet sitting on throne to left, feeding serpent in olive tree in front of her. Inv. 2434. Lisbon. Museu Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Ref.: Dressel (1906) pp. 17–18 O; Savio (1994/1995) p. 81 O. pl. 26.5: Ditto. 81.86 g, 58 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Draped and diademed bust of Olympias to left, her right arm with a serpent-decorated bracelet, her 166

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

right hand holds a sceptre. – Rev.: Nereid riding on a sea-bull. Among the waves several shells and two dolphins are visible. Acc. 1907/229. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: Dressel (1906) pp. 10–11 D; Savio (1994/1995) p. 79 D. pl. 27.1: Ditto. Obverse only. 112.66 g, 54 mm, 12 h. Obv.: Diademed head of Alexander with ram’s horn to left. – Rev.: BACIΛ–EWC, in exergue AΛEIAN∆POY. Nike riding in quadriga to right, holding palm branch. Acc. 1903/873. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: Dressel (1906) p. 7 A; Savio (1994/1995) p. 78 A. pl. 27.2: Ditto. 105.06 g, 60 mm, 11 h. Obv.: Draped and armoured bust of Alexander wearing an Attic helmet to left. On helmet Artemis Tauropolos (A. riding a bull). – Rev.: BACI–ΛE–ΩC – AΛE–ΞAN∆POV. Nike to right presenting a shield supported by Eros. On shield scene with two lovers (?). On right side a trophy and two captives. Acc. 1905/1. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: Dressel (1906) pp. 8–9 B; Savio (1994/1995) p. 78 B. pl. 27.3: Ditto. 77.47 g, 52 mm, 12 h. Obverse only. Obv.: Armoured bust of Alexander with shield and Attic helmet to right, on helmet battle scene. – Rev.: Athena with chiton, peplos, aegis and Attic helmet holds spear in her left, Corinthian helmet in her right hand. At her feet coiling serpent. Behind Athena column inscribed OΛVM/ΠIA/∆OC. On left side olive tree. Inv. 2431. Lisbon. Museu Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Ref.: Dressel (1906) pp. 15–16 M; Savio (1994/1995) pp. 80–81 M. pl. 27.4: Ditto. 47.89 g, 47 mm, 12 h. Obverse only. Obv.: As before, but different style and smaller dimensions around nose and eyes. On helmet Ganymede carried away by Zeus’ eagle. – Rev.: Nereid riding on sea dragon (ketos) to left. Inv. 2432. Lisbon. Museu Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Ref.: Dressel (1906) pp. 16–17 N; Savio (1994/1995) p. 81 N. pl. 27.5: Ditto. 84.30 g, 56 mm, 12 h. Obverse only. Obv.: Armoured bust of Alexander with diadem, shield and spear seen from the front, slightly bearded. On shield zodiac (ram, bull, twins, crab, lion) with Gaia and facing busts of Helios and Selene in centre. – Rev.: As pl. 27.2. Acc. 1907/230. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: Dressel (1906) pp. 9–10 C; Savio (1994/1995) p. 78 C. pl. 27.6: Ditto. 96.44 g, 54 mm, 12 h. Reverse only. Obv.: See pl. 27.1 (same die). – Rev.: BACIΛEVC – AΛEΞAN∆POC. Alexander on foot to right hunting a boar with his spear, at right side tree, two dogs and coiling serpent. Inv. 2428. Lisbon. Museu Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Ref.: Dressel (1906) p. 13 F; Savio (1994/1995) p. 79 F. pl. 27.7: Ditto. 47.61 g, 40 mm, 12 h. Reverse only. Obv.: Laureate head of Apollo to left, laurel branch ahead. – Rev.: BACIΛEVC – 167

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

AΛEIAN∆POC. Alexander with diadem sitting to right, Nike at right side presenting shield and Attic helmet. On shield scene depicting Achilles slaying Penthesilea. Inv. 2427. Lisbon. Museu Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Ref.: Dressel (1906) p. 20 U; Savio (1994/1995) p. 83 U. pl. 28.1: Contorniate. 27.13 g, 38 mm, 6 h. Draped and diademed bust of Olympias to left, her right arm with a bracelet, her right hand holds a sceptre, in right field an engraved palm branch. – Rev.: AΛEΞ–AN∆P– OC BAΣIΛEYC. Alexander wearing a diadem is sitting on a chair, his armour close by, and holds a sword. He is presenting a shield depicting Achilles slaying Penthesilea. An Attic helmet lies on the ground. Acc. 1912/306. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: A. and E. Alföldi, Die Kontorniat-Medaillons I-II. Walter de Gruyter (Berlin/New York 1976/1990) no. 61.4. pl. 28.2: Ditto. 25.87 g, 38 mm, 6 h. Obverse only. Obv.: ALEXANDER MA–GNVS MACEDON. Bust of Alexander wearing lion’s scalp to right. In right field engraved monogram PE. – Rev.: Helena and the dioskuroi. Acc. 1912/659. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: A. and E. Alföldi, Die Kontorniat-Medaillons I-II. Walter de Gruyter (Berlin/New York 1976/1990) no. 9.3. pl. 28.3: Ditto. 26.90 g, 37 mm, 12 h. Obverse only. Obv.: Diademed head of Alexander with flying hair to right. – Rev.: AL–EXANDE–R MAGNVS – MACEDON. Alexander on horse fighting against warrior on foot. Inv. R 4800. Department of Coins & Medals, The British Museum. Ref.: A. and E. Alföldi, Die Kontorniat-Medaillons I-II. Walter de Gruyter (Berlin/New York 1976/1990) no. 45.1. pl. 28.4: Ditto. 23.25 g, 39 mm, 12 h. Obv.: ANTONINVS – PIVS AVG. Laureate and armoured bust of Caracalla to right. – Rev.: REGINA. Olympias on bed with serpent. Acc 1848/8592. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: A. and E. Alföldi, Die Kontorniat-Medaillons I-II. Walter de Gruyter (Berlin/New York 1976/1990) no. 410.2. pl. 29.1: Bronze medallion. By Alessandro Cesati (died after ad 1564). 20.50 g, 50 mm, 6 h. Obv.: PAVLVS III PONT MAX AN XII (= ad 1545/46), in lower case AΛEΞAN∆POC EΠOIEI (Cesati’s signature). – Bust of Pope Paul III (ad 1534–1549) wearing elaborately decorated cope to left. Rev.: OMNES REGES SERVIENT EI. Alexander kneeling in front of the Jewish high priest. Jerusalem and Temple Mount in background. Photograph © Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Ref.: Type of J.G. Pollard, Italian Renaissance medals in the Museo Nazionale of Bargello (Florence c. 1983) pp. 986–987 no. 524. pl. 29.2: Ditto. 36.62 g, 37 mm, 11 h. Obv.: AΛEΞAN∆POΣ. Head of Alexander with Corinthian helmet to left. On helmet scene depicting 168

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C O I N S I L L U S T R AT E D

Neptune with trident riding on two dolphins. – Rev.: ΠEPΣIΣ AΛΩΘEIΣA (Persia captured) in exergue. Triumphal procession of Alexander in Babylon, in quadriga drawn by four elephants. Arch in background with Nike. Bound prisoner in front of Alexander, and two men with trumpets next to chariot. Photograph © Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Ref.: Type of P. Attwood, Italian medals c. 1530 – 1600. I. The British Museum Press (London 2003) no. 947. pl. 29.3: 100 drachma, Greece, 1990, copper-nickel, 10.03 g, 29 mm, 12 h. Obv.: MEΓAΣ AΛEΞAN∆POΣ – BAΣIΛEYΣ MAKE∆ONΩN. Diademed head of Alexander with ram’s horn to right. Below signature B.Σ. – EΛΛHNIKH ∆HMOKPATIA – 100 ∆PAXMEΣ – 1990 – BEPΓINA. Star of Vergina. Acc. 1992/235. Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Ref.: Ch.L. Krause and C. Mishler, 2002 standard catalogue of world coins. 29th edition. Krause Publications (Iola 2002) no. 159.

169

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

AMNG III 1 and 2

Aulock (1979) Bauslaugh (2000) Bellinger (1961) Bellinger (1963) Bernardi (1970) Bieber (1964) Billows (1990) BMC Bosworth (2002) Burrell (2004) CIRP Cahn (1991)

H. Gaebler, Die antiken Münzen Nord-Griechenlands. Die antiken Münzen von Makedonia und Paionia III part 1. Verlag Georg Reimer (Berlin 1906) and part 2. Verlag Walter de Gruyter (Berlin 1935). H. von Aulock, Münzen und Städte Pisidiens Teil II. Istanbuler Mitteilungen Beiheft 22. Verlag Ernst Wasmuth (Tübingen 1979). R.A. Bauslaugh, Silver coinage with the types of Aesillas the Quaestor. ANS Numismatic Studies 22. New York (2000). A.R. Bellinger, Troy. The coins. Supplementary monograph 2. Princeton University Press (Princeton 1961). Essays on the coinage of Alexander the Great. ANS Numismatic Studies 11 (New York 1963). C. Bernardi, I Niketeria, Rivista Italiana di Numismatica e Scienze Affini 18, 1970, pp. 79–90. M. Bieber, Alexander the Great in Greek and Roman art. Argonaut (Chicago 1964). R.A. Billows, Antigonos the One-eyed and the creation of the Hellenistic state. University of California Press (Berkeley and Los Angeles 1990). Catalogue of Greek Coins in the British Museum. 29 vols. in geographical order (London 1873–1927/Reprint Bologna 1963–1965). A.B. Bosworth, The legacy of Alexander. Politics, warfare, and propaganda under the successors. Oxford University Press (Oxford 2002). B. Burrell, Neokoroi. Greek cities and Roman emperors. Brill (Leiden 2004). C.J. Howgego, V. Heuchert and A. Burnett (eds), Coinage and identity in the Roman provinces. Oxford University Press (Oxford 2005). H.A. Cahn, Zum Alexanderbildnis der LysimachosPrägungen in: H.-Chr. Noeske and H. Schubert (eds), Die Münze. Festschrift M. Rosenbaum-Alföldi. Verlag Peter Lang (Frankfurt am Main 1991) pp. 84–98.

170

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

de Callataÿ (1996)

de Callataÿ (1997) de Callataÿ (1998)

Dressel (1906) Gaebler (1906) Giard (1991) von Graeve (2000)

ESM Hadley (1974) Hardie (1985) Holt (2003) Hoover (2002) Howgego (1985) Howgego (1995) Ierardi (1995/1996) Jouanno (1995) Kraft (1965)

F. de Callataÿ, Les monnaies au nom d’Aesillas in: T. Hackens and G. Moucharte (eds), Italiam Fato Profugi: Numismatic studies dedicated to V. and E.E. Clain-Stefanelli. (Louvain-laNeuve 1996) pp. 113–151. L’histoire des guerres mithridatiques vue par les monnaies. (Louvain-La-Neuve 1997). The coins in the name of Sura in: A. Burnett, U. Wartenberg and R. Witschonke (eds), Coins of Macedonia and Rome: Essay in honour of Charles Hersh. Spink (London 1998) pp. 113–117. H. Dressel, Fünf Goldmedaillons aus dem Funde von Abukir. Abhandlungen der Königlich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin 1906). H. Gaebler, Zur Münzkunde Makedoniens V., Zeitschrift für Numismatik 25, 1906, pp. 1–38. J.-B. Giard, L’image d’Alexandre le Grand à la Renaissance, Numismatica e Antichità Classiche. Quaderni Ticinesi 20, 1991, pp. 309–315. V. von Graeve, Die Belagerung Milets durch Alexander den Großen in Civilisation grecque et cultures antiques périphériques: hommage à P. Alexandrescu. Ed. Enciclopedicaˇ (Bucarest 2000) pp. 113–129. E.T. Newell, The coinage of the eastern Seleucid mints. ANS Numismatic Studies 1 (New York 1938/reprint with corr. 1978). R.A. Hadley, Royal propaganda of Seleucus I and Lysimachus, Journal of Hellenic Studies 94, 1974, pp. 50–65. P.H. Hardie, Imago mundi: Cosmological and ideological aspects of the shield of Achilles, Journal of Hellenic Studies 105, 1985, pp. 11–31. F.L. Holt, Alexander the Great and the mystery of the elephant medallions. University of California Press (Berkeley and Los Angeles 2003). O.D. Hoover, The identity of the helmeted head on the ‘Victory’ coinage of Susa, Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau 81, 2002, pp. 51–60. C.J. Howgego, Greek imperial countermarks. The Royal Numismatic Society (London 1985). Ancient history from coins. Routledge (London and New York 1995). M. Ierardi, The Tetradrachms of Agathocles of Syracuse: A preliminary study, American Journal of Numismatics 7–8, 1995/1996, pp. 1–73. C. Jouanno, Alexandre et Olympias: de l’histoire au mythe, Bulletin de l’Association Guillaume Budé (1995) pp. 211–230. K. Kraft, Der behelmte Alexander der Große, Jahrbuch für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte 15, 1965, pp. 7–32.

171

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Kuschel (1961) LAGM Leschhorn (1984) Leschhorn (1991) Levante (1971) Lichtenberger (2003) LIMC Lund (1992) Marinescu (1996)

Mildenberg (1999)

Mittag (1999) Mørkholm (1991) Moreno (1995) Nau (1968) Neuffer (1929) Price (1981) Price (1982)

Price (1991a)

B. Kuschel, Die neuen Münzbilder des Ptolemaios Soter, Jahrbuch für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte 11, 1961, pp. 9–18. W. Leschorn, Lexikon der Aufschriften auf griechischen Münzen = Lexicon of Greek coin inscriptions I. Verlag d. Österr. Akad. d. Wiss. (Vienna 2002). W. Leschhorn, ‘Gründer der Stadt’. Studien zu einem politischreligiösem Phänomen der griechischen Geschichte. Franz Steiner Verlag (Stuttgart 1984). Mythos und Stadtgründung im Nahen Osten in: International meeting of history and archaeology. Delphi 1986 (Athens 1991) pp. 441–452. E. Levante, The coinage of Alexandreia Kat’isson in Cilicia, The Numismatic Chronicle 1971, pp. 93–102. A. Lichtenberger, Kulte und Kultur der Dekapolis. Harrassowitz (Wiesbaden 2003). Lexikon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae. Artemis (Zurich 1981–1997). H.S. Lund, Lysimachus. A study of early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge (London and New York 1992). C.A. Marinescu, Making and spending money along the Bosporus: The Lysimachi coinages minted by Byzantium and Chalcedon and their socio-cultural context. PhD Columbia Univ. UMI microfiche (1996). L. Mildenberg, A note on the coinage of HierapolisBambyce in: M. Amandry and S. Hurter (eds), Travaux de numismatique grecque offerts à Georges Le Rider. Spink (London 1999) pp. 277–284. P.F. Mittag, Alte Köpfe in neuen Händen. Rudolf Habelt (Bonn 1999). O. Mørkholm, Early Hellenistic coinage from the accession of Alexander to the Peace of Apameia (336–186 BC). Cambridge University Press (Cambridge 1991). P. Moreno, Lisippo. L’Arte e la Fortuna. Exhibition Catalogue Rome. Fabbri (Milan 1995). E. Nau, Iulia Domna als Olympias, Jahrbuch für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte 18, 1968, pp. 49–66. E. Neuffer, Das Kostüm Alexanders d. Gr. Verlagshaus Darmstadt (Gießen 1929). M.J. Price, A portrait of Alexander the Great from Egypt in: NNF – NYTT (The Norwegian Numismatic Journal) 10, 1981, pp. 32–37 (English text). The ‘Porus’ Coinage of Alexander the Great: A symbol of concord and community in: S. Scheers (ed.), Studia Paulo Naster Oblata I Numismatica Antiqua. Peeters (Leuven 1982) pp. 75–82. The coinage in the name of Alexander the Great and Philip

172

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Price (1991b) Price (1984) Prieur (2000) Rebuffat (1986) Recueil I 3 RPC I RPC Suppl. RPC II Salzmann (2001)

Savio (1994/1995) SC I Schreiber (1903)

Smith (1988) SNG Ashmolean 3 SNG Ashmolean 4 SNG Aulock

Arrhidaeus. British Museum Press/The Swiss Numismatic Society (Zurich/London 1991). Circulation at Babylon in 323 B.C. in: W. Metcalf (ed.), Mnemata: Papers in memory of Nancy M. Waggoner. (New York 1991) pp. 63–72. S.R.F. Price, Rituals and power. The Roman imperial cult in Asia Minor. (Cambridge 1984). K. and M. Prieur, A type corpus of the Syro-Phoenician tetradrachms and their fractions from 57 BC to AD 253. Chameleon Press Limited (London 2000). F. Rebuffat, Alexandre le Grand et Apollonia de Pisidie, Revue Numismatique 1986, pp. 65–71. W.H. Waddington, E. Babelon and Th. Reinach (eds), Recueil général des monnaies grecques d’Asie Mineure I 3. E. Leroux Éditeur (Paris 1910). A. Burnett, M. Amandry and P.P. Ripollès, Roman provincial coinage I. British Museum Press London/Bibliothèque Nationale Paris (London 1992). A. Burnett, M. Amandry and P.P. Ripollès, Roman provincial coinage. Supplement I. British Museum Press London/ Bibliothèque nationale de France Paris (London 1998). A. Burnett, M. Amandry and I. Carradice, Roman provincial coinage II. British Museum Press London/Bibliothèque nationale de France Paris (London 1999). D. Salzmann, Alexanderschilde – Numismatische Zeugnisse für die Alexanderverehrung Caracallas in: J. Bergemann (ed.), Wissenschaft mit Enthusiasmus. Festschrift K. Fittschen. Verlag Marie Leidorf (Rahden/Westfalen 2001) pp. 173–191. A. Savio, Intorno ai medaglioni talismanici di Tarso e di Aboukir, Rivista Italiana di Numismatica e Scienze Affini 96, 1994/1995, pp. 73–103. A. Houghton and C. Lorber, Seleucid coins I 1–2. The American Numismatic Society (Lancaster/London 2002). Th. Schreiber, Studien über das Bildnis Alexanders des Grossen. Abhandlungen der philologisch-historischen Klasse der Königlich-Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften 21. Teubner (Leipzig 1903). R.R.R. Smith, Hellenistic royal portraits. Clarendon Press (Oxford 1988). Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. Great Britain V. Ashmolean Museum Oxford Part III Macedonia (London 1976). Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. Great Britain V. Ashmolean Museum Oxford Part IV Paeonia – Thessaly (London 1981). Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. Sammlung Hans von Aulock. 19 vols. in geographical order including indices and Nachträge (Berlin 1957–1981).

173

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

SNG Copenhagen

SNG Cilicie SNG Leypold II SNG Levante SNG Mysie SNG PPS SNG Stancomb SNG Tübingen Spencer (2002) Spijkerman (1978) Stewart (1993) Stoneman (1991) Stoneman (2004) Stribrny (1991)

Strubbe (1984–1986) Svenson (1995) Svoronos Svoronos (1907) Thompson (1968)

Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. The Royal Collection of Coins and Medals. Danish National Museum Copenhagen. 43 vols. in geographical order plus Supplements (Copenhagen 1942–1979). Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum France 2. Cabinet des Médailles. Cilicie (Paris 1993). Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. Österreichische Nationalbank, Wien, Sammlung Leypold. Kleinasiatische Münzen der Kaiserzeit II. Phrygien – Kommagene (Vienna 2004). Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. Switzerland I. Levante – Cilicia (Berne 1986). Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum France 5. Cabinet des Médailles. Mysie (Paris 2001). Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. Pfälzer Privatsammlungen 6. Isaurien und Kilikien. (Munich 2001). Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. Great Britain XI. The William Stancomb Collection of Coins of the Black Sea Region. Oxford University Press (Oxford 2000). Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. Münzsammlung der Universität Tübingen. 2. Heft Taurische Chersones – Korkyra (Berlin 1982). D. Spencer, The Roman Alexander. University of Exeter Press (Exeter 2002). A. Spijkerman, The coins of the Decapolis and Provincia Arabia. Franciscan Printing Press (Jerusalem 1978). A. Stewart, Faces of Power. Alexander’s image and Hellenistic politics. University of California Press (Berkeley and Los Angeles 1993). R. Stoneman, The Greek Alexander Romance. Penguin (London 1991). Alexander the Great. Second edition. Routledge (London 2004). K. Stribrny, Zur Entstehung der Elefanten-Exuvie als ‘Africa’-Attribut in: H.-Chr. Noeske and H. Schubert (eds), Die Münze. Festschrift M. Rosenbaum-Alföldi. Verlag Peter Lang (Frankfurt am Main 1991) pp. 378–385. J.H.M. Strubbe, Gründer kleinasiatischer Städte. Fiktion und Realität, Ancient Society 15–17, 1984–1986, pp. 253– 304. D. Svenson, Darstellungen hellenistischer Könige mit Götterattributen. Verlag Peter Lang (Frankfurt am Main 1995). J.N. Svoronos, TA NOMISMATA TOY KPATOYΣ TΩN ΠTOΛEMAIΩN. P.D. Sakkelariou I–IV (Athens 1904– 1908). TA NOMIΣMATA TOY ABOYKIP, Journal International d’Archéologie Numismatique, 10, 1907, pp. 369–371. M. Thompson, The mints of Lysimachus in: C.M. Kraay

174

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Touratsoglou (2000) Vermeule (1982) Vermeule (1986) Weiß (1992) Weiß (1996) WSM Zervos (1967) Zervos (1974) Ziegler (1989) Ziegler (1998)

Ziegler (2003)

(ed.), Essays in Greek Coinage presented to Stanley Robinson. Oxford University Press (Oxford 1968) pp. 163–182. I. Touratsoglou, The Alexander of the coins. Bank of Cyprus (Nicosia 2000). C.C. Vermeule, Alexander the Great, the emperor Severus Alexander and the Aboukir medallions, Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau 61, 1982, pp. 61–72. Alexander the Great conquers Rome. Sir Northwold Nuffler Foundation (Cambridge, Mass. 1986). P. Weiß, Pisidien: Eine historische Landschaft im Licht ihrer Münzprägung, Asia Minor Studien 6, 1992, pp. 143–165. Alexandria Troas: Griechische Traditionen und Mythen in einer römischen Kolonie, Asia Minor Studien 22, 1996, pp. 157–173. E.T. Newell, The coinage of the western Seleucid mints. ANS Numismatic Studies 4 (New York 1941). O.H. Zervos, The early tetradrachms of Ptolemy I, ANS Museum Notes 13 (1967) pp. 1–16. The Alexander mint of Egypt. PhD New York Univ. 1974. Xerox Univ. Microfilms (Ann Arbor, Michigan 1976). R. Ziegler, Münzen Kilikiens aus kleineren deutschen Sammlungen. C.H. Beck (Munich 1989). Alexander der Große als Städtegründer. Fiktion und Realität in: U. Peter (Hrsg.), Stephanos numismatikos. Festschrift E. Schönert-Geiss. Akademie Verlag (Berlin 1998) pp. 679–697. Caracalla, Alexander der Grosse und das Prestigedenken kilikischer Städte, Asia Minor Studien 49, 2003, pp. 115– 131.

175

INDEX

See also plate section under the names of cities and rulers Abila (Dekapolis) 29–30, 52, 61, 80n158, 132–133 Aboukir (Egypt) hoard/medallions 32, 35–38, 45–46, 62–63, 143–152 Abydos 83n189 Achilles 37 Aesillas: coins in the name of 19–20, 23, 31, 42, 51, 60, 122–123 Agathokles of Baktria: coins of 18, 39–41, 50, 60–61, 120–121 Agathokles of Syracuse: coins of 14, 42, 49, 116–117 Aigeai (Kilikia) 20, 22–23, 39, 43–44, 46, 51–53, 60, 124–126 Alexander: called ‘The Great’ 37, 51, 96n335; on early modern and twentieth century medals/coins 42, 56–57; invincible 17, 25, 62; life-time coinage 18, 41, 108–109; portrait amalgamated with Roman emperor/empress 28, 44, 60–61; portraits, representations and statues of 2, 25, 58–63, 82n174; regional and chronological distribution of representations on coins 53–55; scenes on helmets 32, 45; as source of legitimacy for Hellenistic kings 48–51 Alexander on coins (except Koinon): bust-types 46–47; crowning Tyche (?) 29, 31, 55, 61; with diadem 21–25, 28, 34, 37, 43–44; with diadem and ram’s horn 17, 36–37, 42, 59, 62; dream of 27–28, 55; with elaborate drapery 28, 45–46; with elephant

scalp 9, 11–15, 42, 59, 63; as founder of a city 22–24, 53, 61; as founder shaking hands with Seleukos 29, 55, 61, 86n221; frontal bust 37, 46, 63; as Herakles 18, 21, 23, 37, 39–41, 46, 52, 55, 60–61, 63; on horseback attacking elephant 6–9; on horseback greeting god 26, 55; on horseback on contorniates 37; on horseback with Zeus and Pisidian 33–34, 55; hunting 35, 37; with mitra and ram’s horn 13, 42, 59, 63; performing sacrifice 26, 55; with Philip II (?) 51, 101n18; being presented his weapons 37; in quadriga 12, 37, 60; with ram’s horn 18–20, 42, 63; as shield device 5, 34–35; with spear and thunderbolt 24–25, 55, 61; with thunderbolt, sword and spear 6–9; taming Boukephalos 34; wearing Attic-type helmet 37, 44–45; wearing Phrygiantype helmet 6, 44–45; with windblown hair 31–32, 37, 43, 62–63 Alexander on coins of the Makedonian League Koinon (various types) 31–33, 35–37, 39–40, 42–47, 51, 60–62; with Attic-type helmet 32, 62–63; in armour holding spear and sword upside down/seated on column: 32, 62; on horseback wearing Attic-type helmet 45, 99n34; taming Boukephalos 32, 34, 63 Alexander Doryphoros 25, 61–62 Alexander Keraunophoros 7, 58 Alexander VI (Seleukid king) 43, 60

177

INDEX

[Olympia] Alexandreia (festival) 33, 37, 93n301 Alexandria in the Troad 22, 26–27, 50, 52–53, 62, 124–128 Alexandria kat’Isson 20–24, 39, 43–44, 46, 52–53, 60–61, 123–124 Antiochia on the Chrysoroas (i. e. Gerasa) 30 Apelles (painter) 7, 25, 58 Apollonia Mordiaion (Pisidia) 30, 39, 52–53, 61, 133–134 Athena mistaken as Alexander 56–57 Athens ‘Niketerion’ 99n33 Beroia (Makedonia) 31–33, 44, 62, 136 Boukephalos 32, 37, 63

Elagabalus (Roman emperor) and Alexander 33, 37, 54, 63 elephant medallions 6–9, 45, 58–59, 109–110 Ephesos (Ionia) 86n221 Epiphania (Kilikia) 20, 24, 43, 52, 60–61 Eugeneia/Eugenes 20, 22, 28, 50–52 festival/cult in honour of Alexander (see also [Olympia] Alexandreia) 30, 50, 59–60 founder (ktistes) 4–5, 22, 26–29, 31, 34, 51–55, 61, 76n103

Genarches (progenitor) 28–29, 52 Gerasa (Dekapolis) 28–29, 51–52, 131–132 gold medallions see Aboukir and Tarsos Heliopolis (Baalbek) 34–35, 142–143 Herakles mistaken for Alexander 40–41 Hierapolis-Bambyke 66n1 Hierapolis (Kastabala) 20, 24, 43, 46, 52 Homonoia (concord) 29 Iraq hoard 8

Caesar, Gaius Iulius 23 Caesarea ad Libanum 30–31, 53, 135 Caesarea in Kappadokia 34–35, 142–143 Cambridge medallion 35 Caracalla (Roman emperor) imitating Alexander 5, 33–35, 37, 43, 53–54, 142–144 Cesati, Alessandro (medalist) 57 Chandragupta: treaty with 15 Chigi shield 36 coinage (in general): use and distribution 2–5, 58 contorniates 32, 37–38, 40, 43–44, 46, 51, 60, 152–154 Dekapolis (later provinces of Arabia and Syria Palaestina) 28, 44, 52, 54, 63 Dion (Dekapolis) 28

founding legend of a city 22–23, 26–27, 52–53, 61

Kapitolias (Dekapolis) 28–29, 45–46, 51–52, 61, 130–133 Kilikia 20–24, 43, 46, 52–55, 60–61, 63 Lysimachos: coins of 10, 16–17, 19, 31, 37, 42–43, 48–49, 59, 119–120 Lysippos (sculptor) 25, 34, 107n48 Makedonia (Roman province) 18–20 Makedonian League (Koinon) 21, 31–33, 37, 39, 44, 136–141 Makedoniké (honorary title) 22, 50–52 Memphis: coins from 9–10, 45, 58–59, 69n26, 111–112 Mir Zadah hoard 9, 67n13 Mithradates VI of Pontos 19–20, 43, 60 Naukratis: coins from 9–10, 13, 58–59, 111–112 Neisos gem 7, 58 Nikaia (Bithynia) 21, 24–26, 52–53, 61–63, 126–127 Nikomedia 26 Olympias (mother of Alexander) 31–32, 36–38, 63, 78n134 Palmyra 28 Parthia 28, 35 Pella (Dekapolis) 28 Peltai (Phrygia) 101n22 Pergamon head 63 Philip II 32, 36 Poros 6–7

178

INDEX

Poros medallions see elephant medallions Ptolemaios (son of Lysimachos) 17, 50 Ptolemy I: coins of 10–14, 17, 42, 48–49, 59, 112–116 Ptolemaios II: procession of 12, 60 Pyrgoteles (engraver) 105n18 Rome 37–38 Sagalassos (Pisidia) 33–34, 53, 62, 141–142 second sophistic 4, 37, 54 Severus Alexander (Roman emperor) and Alexander 30, 33, 37, 54, 63

Seleukos I: coins of 10, 14–15, 42, 49, 117–118 Smyrna (Ionia) 27–28, 52, 62, 129–130 Tarsos (Kilikia) hoard/medallions 32, 35–38, 40, 43, 46, 61–63, 144–146 Telmessos (Lykia) see Ptolemaios (son of Lysimachos) Thasos (head from) 59–60 Tryphon (Seleukid usurper) 43, 60 veneration of Alexander in third century AD 31–33, 37, 51

179